Howdy, Stranger!

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

The 10 Best MMOs of 2017 - The List - MMORPG.com

1457910

Comments

  • noll1ngtonnoll1ngton Member UncommonPosts: 32
    I remember when this site was about MMORPGs not mobas, fps, multiplayer sims and hack and slash dungeon crawlers.
    Half of the games in this (yet another) best mmorpgs of 2017 list are not even RPGS and are hardly Massive Multiplayers.
    List and Site should be changed to "some of the best games you can play with a few people spanning different genres of games of 2017 in the opinion of yet another clueless author being paid to advertise a bunch of irrelevant games on a site that was founded on bringing news about RPG games"
  • btdtbtdt Member RarePosts: 516

    Rhygarth said:

    MMO massively multiplayer online is not 100 people on a server... i would not class massively as 100, you on the other hand might but 100 in my book is not massive 1000+ then yes



    Then WoW must not be an MMO then because there are many servers that don't come close to 100 people consecutively online. Sure if you add up players across multiple servers it does, but on a single server, many fail your definition.

    "The Best of" lists are hardly the best of... just another year end tradition like resolutions... most of which are forgotten before the new year even begins.

    Just a small reminder... the point of the article is to get a reaction... and a reaction it got. It's why Trump tweets so much. Not a day goes by that someone isn't quoting him.
  • Jean-Luc_PicardJean-Luc_Picard Member LegendaryPosts: 8,057
    btdt said:


    Then WoW must not be an MMO then because there are many servers that don't come close to 100 people consecutively online.
    I'd love to have the source of your numbers. Note that I'm not holding my breath.
    ConstantineMerusNepheth
    "The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent" - Qui-gon Jinn in Star Wars.
    After many years of reading Internet forums, there's no doubt that nor does the ability to write.
    CPU: Core I7 9700k (4.90ghz) - GPU: Gigabyte GTX 980 Ti G1 Gaming - RAM: 16GB Kingston HyperX Savage DDR4 3000 - Motherboard: Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Ultra - PSU: Antec TruePower New 750W - Storage: Kingston KC1000 NVMe 960gb SSD and 2x1TB WD Velociraptor HDDs (Raid 0) - Main display: Philips 40PUK6809 4K 3D TV - Second display: Philips 273v 27" gaming monitor - VR: Pimax 8K headset and Razer Hydra controllers - Soundcard: Sony STR-DH550 AV Receiver HDMI linked with the GPU and the TV, with Jamo S 426 HS 3 5.0 speakers and Pioneer S-21W subwoofer - OS: Windows 10 Pro 64 bits.

  • ConstantineMerusConstantineMerus Member EpicPosts: 2,691
    btdt said:


    Then WoW must not be an MMO then because there are many servers that don't come close to 100 people consecutively online.
    I'd love to have the source of your numbers. Note that I'm not holding my breath.
    Also what matters is the capability and the capacity.  An empty bus driving around is not suddenly a bike because it only has 1 person in it. 
    MadFrenchiePhaserlightCecropia
    Constantine, The Console Poster

    • "One of the most difficult tasks men can perform, however much others may despise it, is the invention of good games and it cannot be done by men out of touch with their instinctive selves." - Carl Jung
    • Song of the Week: Blackfield by Blackfield from Blackfield (2005)
    • Currently Playing: Devil May Cry 1
    • Favorite Drink: Bruichladdich Black Art 5th 1992
    • Gaming Timeline: Arcade, Commodore 64, Amiga 500, SEGA, IBM, PS, PC, PS2, More PCs, PS3, Giant PC, PS4, No More PCs, PS4 Pro.
  • lahnmirlahnmir Member EpicPosts: 2,880
    edited December 2017
    btdt said:


    Then WoW must not be an MMO then because there are many servers that don't come close to 100 people consecutively online.
    I'd love to have the source of your numbers. Note that I'm not holding my breath.
    Also what matters is the capability and the capacity.  An empty bus driving around is not suddenly a bike because it only has 1 person in it. 
    Very true. But to expand on that analogy, if you never have more then 4 passengers you might not need a bus in the first place and switch to a car. Hence the birth of survival games, squad based shooters and lobby based pvp/moba games.

    I think half of the MMOs out there could do without the 'massively' just fine because it doesn't really ad anything except for a chat channel.

    /Cheers,
    Lahnmir
    TorvalConstantineMerus
    'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'

    Kyleran on yours sincerely 


    But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.

    Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,483
    lahnmir said:
    btdt said:


    Then WoW must not be an MMO then because there are many servers that don't come close to 100 people consecutively online.
    I'd love to have the source of your numbers. Note that I'm not holding my breath.
    Also what matters is the capability and the capacity.  An empty bus driving around is not suddenly a bike because it only has 1 person in it. 
    Very true. But to expand on that analogy, if you never have more then 4 passengers you might not need a bus in the first place and switch to a car. Hence the birth of survival games, squad based shooters and lobby based pvp/moba games.

    I think half of the MMOs out there could do without the 'massively' just fine because it doesn't really ad anything except for a chat channel.

    /Cheers,
    Lahnmir
    And that's such a shame, the potential of the genre's only unique strengths is largely wasted.
    lahnmirConstantineMerusNilden

    image
  • jazz.bejazz.be Member UncommonPosts: 878
    So Battlefield series are MMO's as well
  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 19,760
    btdt said:


    Then WoW must not be an MMO then because there are many servers that don't come close to 100 people consecutively online.
    I'd love to have the source of your numbers. Note that I'm not holding my breath.
    Also what matters is the capability and the capacity.  An empty bus driving around is not suddenly a bike because it only has 1 person in it. 
    It's sad that capacity and quantity, not quality, of interaction is the defining attribute. Maybe that is why that old static concept of MMOs is dying. People are realizing that quality, not quantity, is what they want.

    I have more interaction, and more quality interactions, in ESO, D2, and SWL than I do in LotRO, WoW, EQ2, or Rift and yet only one of the former is a full on MMO. I actually interact with other players randomly in those games. We help each other.

    What does it matter if something has a potential if that isn't realized. Do I really care if a game can have thousands on the screen at one time if that never happens if it never behaves like an MMO in practice?

    A bus that carries 50 people isn't more of a bus than the one that carries 20. It's just bigger slower and more costly. The problem the bus people are finding out is that a passenger van can do the same job better and it's often a more pleasant ride. The passenger van company is offering a better bus service. That makes the bus people feel marginalized, but the van people don't care anymore because the bus people have been pretentious elitist assholes for the last 15 years and no one wants to ride their fucking buses anymore. Wait, wut? :lol:
    Fedora - A modern, free, and open source Operating System. https://getfedora.org/

    traveller, interloper, anomaly, iteration


  • PhaserlightPhaserlight Member EpicPosts: 2,936
    edited December 2017
    Torval said:
    btdt said:


    Then WoW must not be an MMO then because there are many servers that don't come close to 100 people consecutively online.
    I'd love to have the source of your numbers. Note that I'm not holding my breath.
    Also what matters is the capability and the capacity.  An empty bus driving around is not suddenly a bike because it only has 1 person in it. 
    It's sad that capacity and quantity, not quality, of interaction is the defining attribute. Maybe that is why that old static concept of MMOs is dying. People are realizing that quality, not quantity, is what they want.

    I have more interaction, and more quality interactions, in ESO, D2, and SWL than I do in LotRO, WoW, EQ2, or Rift and yet only one of the former is a full on MMO. I actually interact with other players randomly in those games. We help each other.

    What does it matter if something has a potential if that isn't realized. Do I really care if a game can have thousands on the screen at one time if that never happens if it never behaves like an MMO in practice?

    A bus that carries 50 people isn't more of a bus than the one that carries 20. It's just bigger slower and more costly. The problem the bus people are finding out is that a passenger van can do the same job better and it's often a more pleasant ride. The passenger van company is offering a better bus service. That makes the bus people feel marginalized, but the van people don't care anymore because the bus people have been pretentious elitist assholes for the last 15 years and no one wants to ride their fucking buses anymore. Wait, wut? :lol:
    Yes, well, I like to think I've excluded myself from the elitist crowd but one day if busses are ever back in style then everyone calling these vans busses are going to feel pretty foolish.

    Like, does one rent an Uber and then ask his friends 'shall we ride the bus to the airport?'

    It's fine if Uber is an all-around better service for one's needs, but why call it a bus?  It seems misleading.

    To get right to the point, I agree with the other poster who stated that a big thing MMORPGs have to offer is quasi-random socialization; you don't get to pick who your bus partners are as much as you do when riding Uber.

    "The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
    Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 4 tracks in Distance

  • ConstantineMerusConstantineMerus Member EpicPosts: 2,691
    lahnmir said:
    btdt said:


    Then WoW must not be an MMO then because there are many servers that don't come close to 100 people consecutively online.
    I'd love to have the source of your numbers. Note that I'm not holding my breath.
    Also what matters is the capability and the capacity.  An empty bus driving around is not suddenly a bike because it only has 1 person in it. 
    Very true. But to expand on that analogy, if you never have more then 4 passengers you might not need a bus in the first place and switch to a car. Hence the birth of survival games, squad based shooters and lobby based pvp/moba games.

    I think half of the MMOs out there could do without the 'massively' just fine because it doesn't really ad anything except for a chat channel.

    /Cheers,
    Lahnmir
    Yes you are right. But that doesn't change the current definitions. They dropped the massively part in design, but kept the name. 

    Whoever believes the definition has changed has to do more than just saying that and start calling whatever they "feel appropriate" an mmo. We have to understand the logic of this newly changed definition. Because right now, it seems you guys only call super hyped games an MMO. 

    You guys are the professionals. How about instead of fighting us in the comments section with sarcastic remarks, write an article stating how this progression has happened (besides a marketing scheme) and how would you know a game is an MMO or not. 
    PhaserlightMadFrenchie
    Constantine, The Console Poster

    • "One of the most difficult tasks men can perform, however much others may despise it, is the invention of good games and it cannot be done by men out of touch with their instinctive selves." - Carl Jung
    • Song of the Week: Blackfield by Blackfield from Blackfield (2005)
    • Currently Playing: Devil May Cry 1
    • Favorite Drink: Bruichladdich Black Art 5th 1992
    • Gaming Timeline: Arcade, Commodore 64, Amiga 500, SEGA, IBM, PS, PC, PS2, More PCs, PS3, Giant PC, PS4, No More PCs, PS4 Pro.
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,483
    Torval said:
    btdt said:


    Then WoW must not be an MMO then because there are many servers that don't come close to 100 people consecutively online.
    I'd love to have the source of your numbers. Note that I'm not holding my breath.
    Also what matters is the capability and the capacity.  An empty bus driving around is not suddenly a bike because it only has 1 person in it. 
    It's sad that capacity and quantity, not quality, of interaction is the defining attribute. Maybe that is why that old static concept of MMOs is dying. People are realizing that quality, not quantity, is what they want.

    I have more interaction, and more quality interactions, in ESO, D2, and SWL than I do in LotRO, WoW, EQ2, or Rift and yet only one of the former is a full on MMO. I actually interact with other players randomly in those games. We help each other.

    What does it matter if something has a potential if that isn't realized. Do I really care if a game can have thousands on the screen at one time if that never happens if it never behaves like an MMO in practice?

    A bus that carries 50 people isn't more of a bus than the one that carries 20. It's just bigger slower and more costly. The problem the bus people are finding out is that a passenger van can do the same job better and it's often a more pleasant ride. The passenger van company is offering a better bus service. That makes the bus people feel marginalized, but the van people don't care anymore because the bus people have been pretentious elitist assholes for the last 15 years and no one wants to ride their fucking buses anymore. Wait, wut? :lol:
    The quality of the interactions is not part of the genre definition.  Only the capacity of the scope of interaction.
    ConstantineMerus

    image
  • ConstantineMerusConstantineMerus Member EpicPosts: 2,691
    Torval said:
    btdt said:


    Then WoW must not be an MMO then because there are many servers that don't come close to 100 people consecutively online.
    I'd love to have the source of your numbers. Note that I'm not holding my breath.
    Also what matters is the capability and the capacity.  An empty bus driving around is not suddenly a bike because it only has 1 person in it. 
    It's sad that capacity and quantity, not quality, of interaction is the defining attribute. Maybe that is why that old static concept of MMOs is dying. People are realizing that quality, not quantity, is what they want.

    I have more interaction, and more quality interactions, in ESO, D2, and SWL than I do in LotRO, WoW, EQ2, or Rift and yet only one of the former is a full on MMO. I actually interact with other players randomly in those games. We help each other.

    What does it matter if something has a potential if that isn't realized. Do I really care if a game can have thousands on the screen at one time if that never happens if it never behaves like an MMO in practice?

    A bus that carries 50 people isn't more of a bus than the one that carries 20. It's just bigger slower and more costly. The problem the bus people are finding out is that a passenger van can do the same job better and it's often a more pleasant ride. The passenger van company is offering a better bus service. That makes the bus people feel marginalized, but the van people don't care anymore because the bus people have been pretentious elitist assholes for the last 15 years and no one wants to ride their fucking buses anymore. Wait, wut? :lol:
    Yo mate, howdy and happy holidays! <3

    I never meant that these non-MMO games lack quality or interaction or any of the other good stuff. I never said MMOs are better than other games. I also never said that you can't have interaction in other types of games.

    What you care or not care doesn't affect the genre's definition. I have never got scared watching a horror movie, not even a little bit. I can't change the definition and call them comedies, because I personally don't get terrified watching them. The genre's definition is self-determining and my personal feeling is irrelevant. 

    There are standards for designing a bus. You can't design a vehicle that can carry 5 person and call it a bus, market it as a bus, and sell it as a bus. Of course when it comes down to video games we don't have these type of standards. 

    Yes a van ride can be more pleasant. Again, the argument here isn't about the amount of potential joy people experience in different games. But besides the capacity parameter, there are also other differences between a van and a bus and can't do the "same job" as you stated. If you are taking a long trip, for instance a 20hr ride, a bus offers way more convenience over a van. Hence the ride would become more pleasant. You can't take long trips with vans. You'd know that if you were a hippie in the 60s ;)

    About the "pretentious elitist assholes" part, well that's a bit weird. I'm not sure where you got that from. A game not being an MMO is not an insult.

    Considering your other posts mate, I think you are taking this whole debate rather personal. As in you believe people are belittling the games you play. I don't think I have ever done anything in that regard, and if I did unintentionally, I apologize. 

    This is my whole argument if anyone cares what I think: 
    The change of the definition isn't due to the progression of the genre, but is due to the lack of relevant titles.

    If anyone believes in this "progress" please do state your reasons. 
    MadFrenchieIselin
    Constantine, The Console Poster

    • "One of the most difficult tasks men can perform, however much others may despise it, is the invention of good games and it cannot be done by men out of touch with their instinctive selves." - Carl Jung
    • Song of the Week: Blackfield by Blackfield from Blackfield (2005)
    • Currently Playing: Devil May Cry 1
    • Favorite Drink: Bruichladdich Black Art 5th 1992
    • Gaming Timeline: Arcade, Commodore 64, Amiga 500, SEGA, IBM, PS, PC, PS2, More PCs, PS3, Giant PC, PS4, No More PCs, PS4 Pro.
  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 19,760
    edited December 2017
    Torval said:
    btdt said:


    Then WoW must not be an MMO then because there are many servers that don't come close to 100 people consecutively online.
    I'd love to have the source of your numbers. Note that I'm not holding my breath.
    Also what matters is the capability and the capacity.  An empty bus driving around is not suddenly a bike because it only has 1 person in it. 
    It's sad that capacity and quantity, not quality, of interaction is the defining attribute. Maybe that is why that old static concept of MMOs is dying. People are realizing that quality, not quantity, is what they want.

    I have more interaction, and more quality interactions, in ESO, D2, and SWL than I do in LotRO, WoW, EQ2, or Rift and yet only one of the former is a full on MMO. I actually interact with other players randomly in those games. We help each other.

    What does it matter if something has a potential if that isn't realized. Do I really care if a game can have thousands on the screen at one time if that never happens if it never behaves like an MMO in practice?

    A bus that carries 50 people isn't more of a bus than the one that carries 20. It's just bigger slower and more costly. The problem the bus people are finding out is that a passenger van can do the same job better and it's often a more pleasant ride. The passenger van company is offering a better bus service. That makes the bus people feel marginalized, but the van people don't care anymore because the bus people have been pretentious elitist assholes for the last 15 years and no one wants to ride their fucking buses anymore. Wait, wut? :lol:
    Yes, well, I like to think I've excluded myself from the elitist crowd but one day if busses are ever back in style then everyone calling these vans busses are going to feel pretty foolish.

    Like, does one rent an Uber and then ask his friends 'shall we ride the bus to the airport?'

    It's fine if Uber is an all-around better service for one's needs, but why call it a bus?  It seems misleading.

    To get right to the point, I agree with the other poster who stated that a big thing MMORPGs have to offer is quasi-random socialization; you don't get to pick who your bus partners are as much as you do when riding Uber.
    What are buses but big vans and vans but smaller buses? Is the point the vehicle your riding the trip itself?

    What good is meeting a bunch of people if the interaction is poor? I met MrMelGibson in WoW and he was going to twink me some bags so I didn't have to surmount that ridiculous hurdle alone. But since we're not actually on the same server we couldn't do that. I couldn't care less about all the great explanations why that is, I'm aware of them, but the bottom line is that the interaction sucks and is limiting in a genre style where that is supposed to excel.

    Why is it that MMOs fail so badly at the one thing they're supposed to do well? Lahnmir nailed why no one wants to ride the bus anymore.

    @ConstantineMerus - there is no concrete definition of MMO. I've already explained why earlier in the thread. It is always a comparison to a concrete baseline and not a number on it's own. It is a term that shows relationship to something else, not absolute position. Massively is a relative term. You can't define massively on its own.

    Mathematically speaking "Massively" is a greater than / less than sign not an equals sign. A comparative operator can't stand on its own so it either has to have a value or be related to an existing value. Massively is significantly greater than the thing it's being compared to.

    I wonder how many here consider Shroud of the Avatar an MMO? The creator of the term calls it one even though the world is instanced zoned maps.

    edit: fighting forum formatting
    Fedora - A modern, free, and open source Operating System. https://getfedora.org/

    traveller, interloper, anomaly, iteration


  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,483
    edited December 2017
    Agreed with @ConstantineMerus in whole.

    The MMORPG genre started as a niche, one title achieved huge amounts of success, and since then...  Every other title has largely enjoyed a niche following relative to the industry.  There's nothing wrong with that- it certainly doesn't mean the genre definition needs to be thrown out simply to have more games to talk about.

    Talk about them.  We're all gamer nerds.  Just stop trying to call them something they're not when it's unnecessary, arbitrary, and confusing.
    ConstantineMerusIselin

    image
  • ConstantineMerusConstantineMerus Member EpicPosts: 2,691
    Man cover any game you want. Gamespot and IGN started covering comics, TV shows and movies a couple of years ago. But they don't call them freaking video games just to be able to write about them. And no one says your site's name is GAMEspot so you are allowed to write only about games. Stop trolling us! :grimace:
    MadFrenchie
    Constantine, The Console Poster

    • "One of the most difficult tasks men can perform, however much others may despise it, is the invention of good games and it cannot be done by men out of touch with their instinctive selves." - Carl Jung
    • Song of the Week: Blackfield by Blackfield from Blackfield (2005)
    • Currently Playing: Devil May Cry 1
    • Favorite Drink: Bruichladdich Black Art 5th 1992
    • Gaming Timeline: Arcade, Commodore 64, Amiga 500, SEGA, IBM, PS, PC, PS2, More PCs, PS3, Giant PC, PS4, No More PCs, PS4 Pro.
  • FlyByKnightFlyByKnight Member EpicPosts: 3,967
    Hey guys, I'm trying to compile a couple more Top 10 Lists. Help me out. So far I only have:

    Top 10 First Person Shooters 2017
    -----------------------------
    • Elder Scrolls Online
    • Archeage (because if you zoom all the way in it's First Person)


    Top 10 Wireless PC Peripherals 2017
    -----------------------------
    • Cereal Bowl
    • Wexford Canned Air
    • Back Scratcher

    Any suggestions to finish these up? Thanks.
    MadFrenchieConstantineMerusIselinDavodtheTuttkjempffthighhighs
    "As far as the forum code of conduct, I would think it's a bit outdated and in need of a refre *CLOSED*" 

    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • GeezerGamerGeezerGamer Member EpicPosts: 8,775
    Hey guys, I'm trying to compile a couple more Top 10 Lists. Help me out. So far I only have:

    Top 10 First Person Shooters 2017
    -----------------------------
    • Elder Scrolls Online
    • Archeage (because if you zoom all the way in it's First Person)


    Top 10 Wireless PC Peripherals 2017
    -----------------------------
    • Cereal Bowl
    • Wexford Canned Air
    • Back Scratcher

    Any suggestions to finish these up? Thanks.
    Don't forget Solitaire
  • Phoenix_HawkPhoenix_Hawk Member UncommonPosts: 145
    edited December 2017
    All MMOs are online games, but not all online games are MMOs, yet some people keep trying to INSIST that they are. I fail to see how defining the game you like as an online game, rather than a MMO, takes anything away from the game, but some put forth a lot of energy trying to claim they are MMOs, as if it not being a MMO was some great black mark against it.

    I've frequently seen people try to claim that since a lot of people are playing a game online, at the same time, it therefore makes it a MMO, and the old crock about how MMOs have "evolved" over the years, so the old definitions don't fit any more. Although based on such definitions, even something like Skyrim played on Steam for instance becomes a MMO. Some will toss the capacity for multiplayer into their definition, but then it will only need to be an active two player game played online to become a MMO.

    It's not how many are playing a game online at the same time, it's how many the game can support playing **TOGETHER** at the same time. Many online games these days limit that to about four, to eight, when there have been arena shooters like the first Unreal Tournament released back in the 1990s, which only had online play capacity, rather than even being an outright online game, that was capable of handling some sixteen, or more people playing together. I'd say at least around 30 players actively playing together in a game would be the minimum count to consider it *massively* multiplayer, rather than just multiplayer.

    Online games over the years have become less about large group content, as with so many online games out there, games that try to revolve around large group content don't tend to last, as they can't maintain the required player base. That's the thing that has changed, it's not an "evolution" of MMOs, it's the over saturation of online games on a whole, as more can be released in a period of a few months, or less, than used to exist in total. This is why so many current online games aren't MMOs, just online games, so if you want to put out lists such as this, call the games the more all encompassing term of "online games," not "MMOs," and you won't see these valid complaints any more.
  • WylfWylf Member UncommonPosts: 368



    Thane said:

    i'd say warframe has more players online than some other mmos. so it's actually quite massive, and multiplayer, and online



    uh and if they are no mmos, why is GW? what's the max per instance, 40? 100?

    sounds like a big battlefield to me, eh?



    get some fresh panties guys and chill
    sgel said:
    Could the people who say that some of the games on the list aren't mmos, defind what an mmo is?

    Just curious what each person's definition is.

    It's "massively multiplayer", not "massive + multiplayer".  Chess is played by a "massive" number of people (600 million), it is "multiplayer" (2 players), it is online.  There's all three boxes for you box-checkers.  Must be a MMORPG?  Reductio ad absurdum.

    It's hard to believe the goalposts have moved so far this must even be a discussion.

    That stated, it's not just about how many people are literally simultaneously interacting in a meaningful way; MUDs are a thing, and somewhat distinct from MMORPGs.  The term "MMORPG" also has meaningful connotation like:

    *A persistent world
    *Large numbers of people in the same digital space
    *Progression
    *Role-playing

    Publishing a list like this adds further confusion about what the term "MMORPG" means at a time when many people seem to be struggling with the concept.  This is mmorpg.com; you could have used this as an opportunity to showcase some MMORPGs if you needed 5 or so spots to fill, regardless of whether or not they are popular!  Perhaps in drawing your community's attention to actual MMORPGs you may even help some of them to become popular.

    From your game list:

    Rift
    WildStar
    TERA
    EVE Online
    Lord of the Rings Online
    Final Fantasy XI
    Dark Age of Camelot
    Ryzom
    Perpetuum
    PlanetSide 2
    Dungeon & Dragons Online
    Ultima Online
    EverQuest
    Lineage 2
    DC Universe Online
    Anarchy Online
    Dragon Nest
    World of Warcraft
    Age of Conan: Unchained
    Firefall
    Wurm Online
    Age of Wushu
    Vendetta Online
    Star Wars: The Old Republic
    Continent of the Ninth Seal
    Pirates of the Burning Sea
    Uncharted Waters Online
    A Tale in the Desert
    Entropia Universe
    Mortal Online

    I submit that a random selection of any five from there in place of the titles that are not MMORPGs would improve your list.



    Well... damn, that was well said!
  • MountainslideMountainslide Member UncommonPosts: 6

    Rhygarth said:

    Lol the first 4 are not even MMO's :P



    What some of you and you being the older crowd (as well as people who never read between the lines) don't know is that the definition of mmos has changed quite a bit since the early days of eq, ac and wow.

    Who knows, the definition could make some horrible leaps in the near future.
  • GeezerGamerGeezerGamer Member EpicPosts: 8,775

    Rhygarth said:

    Lol the first 4 are not even MMO's :P



    What some of you and you being the older crowd (as well as people who never read between the lines) don't know is that the definition of mmos has changed quite a bit since the early days of eq, ac and wow.

    Who knows, the definition could make some horrible leaps in the near future.

    Sure did
    MadFrenchie
  • uriel_mafessuriel_mafess Member UncommonPosts: 81
    edited December 2017


    No, ALL of these games are MMOs, but what an MMO is has changed greatly since the genre’s inception. And if you disagree, that’s fine. Just make your own list.



    Its not fine. One thing is to have different standards/ideas about things and another one is to change the definitions. Definitions are closed structures. Some might have some margin in them but have clearly definited characteristc that must be fulfilled.

    Even the friking wikipedia has an "OK-ish" definition of what an MMO is and at least 4 of those in the list dont comply with all the characteristics of that definition.

    So no. Is not ok to "disagree".

    Is a need, even a duty, to call out someone that is horribly mistanken and ignores the meaning of the words he uses. First to help him improve and second to prevent others from falling into the same ignorance/misuse.
  • nate1980nate1980 Member UncommonPosts: 1,922

    sgel said:

    Could the people who say that some of the games on the list aren't mmos, defind what an mmo is?

    Just curious what each person's definition is.



    I doubt it's even worth discussing at this point. Basically, it sort of goes like this:

    This website was the initial website to focus solely on MMORPG's. I've been a member since 2003 or 4 with my first account. Users and autor's on this site coined it as a Large Multiplayer game that is played online in a persistent world. The RPG part is self explanatory and could be replaced with FPS or RTS for the sub-genre. But the MMO genre is just that. It's a battle those of us argued and fought about for years before, it seems, most of us have moved on for the most part from this website to other websites.

    Covering only MMORPG's is what made this website unique and worth coming to. We were all mostly fans of MMO games to include games like UO, DAOC, EQ, Shadowbane, and SWG. After WoW, it all sorta went downhill from there on this site.

    Since MMORPG.com wants to cover non-MMO's, it now competes with Gamespot, IGN, and the rest. MMORPG.com used to be my one and only website I'd follow multiple times daily. Now I follow Gamespot and check in here a few times a year.

    The author's on this site brush the topic aside, which is disrespectful to those of us who've been a part of this community since the industry coined the term and before they were even of age to write an editorial. So when this is brought up, it's a sore subject for everyone.
  • nate1980nate1980 Member UncommonPosts: 1,922

    SBFord said:

    Geez, people, lighten up. It's not like Bill said these were all MMORPGs, simply "MMOs".

    I dunno...."M" (MASSIVE) "M" (MULTIPLAYER) "O" (ONLINE) all seem to fit each of these games. The definition of massive has changed. The days of 1000s of players sharing a single game are mostly gone and if you consider "servers" -- most of which host fewer than 500 players -- these games all fit. 

    The "new" MMO is 50+ to whatever number of players together in one place. People need to adapt with the times. Someday maybe the more "traditional" version of MMO will come back, but for now, times have changed. It's not 2007 any more.




    With all due respect, and I mean that, I used to be a huge fan of your site over a decade ago, but since when can people start changing the definition of something? I mean, if tomorrows generation decides to re-define what we call cars to include anything with wheels as being cars, car enthusiasts everywhere would be up in arms.

    You all helped fuel the MMO movement during the EQ, DAoC, and SWG era. So you all know better than most on this site that we're a passionate bunch. People who are mainly MMORPG fans are looking for MMORPG's. Not games kind with online elements. We rank our favorite MMORPG's like fans of a football team do with their teams, and we defend our favorite games and root for them much the same way. By including non-MMORPG's to an annual ranking that we use to not only see how our games stack up against the competition, you've eliminated the chance for actual MMORPG's from getting any kind of spotlight, thus support from possible bored players of other MMORPG's from considering another game. I'm not sure if that makes sense, but it's a big deal to us.

    It's your site, not ours, so you'll do what you will. And we've swallowed the non-MMORPG coverage because honestly most of us aren't just pure MMORPG game fans, we're also RPG fans aswell, but the annual rankings is a once a year event that we get excited for and this year is blasphemy for us MMORPG purists.
    ScotIselinGreme
  • cheyanecheyane Member EpicPosts: 6,403
    I prefer having a place to come to than to have this place close down. Some of you don't want to live in the real world. There are not enough MMORPGs for this site to survive on them alone. I don't care about definitions. I like coming here.
    image
Sign In or Register to comment.