Howdy, Stranger!

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

Fortnite is Necessary - MMORPG.com

24

Comments

  • alkarionlogalkarionlog Member EpicPosts: 3,583
    I blame minecraft. A classic example when modders go too far.
    if you blame minecraft for modder go too far, you never saw skyrim mods...
    DeddmeatTierless
    FOR HONOR, FOR FREEDOM.... and for some money.
  • AeanderAeander Member LegendaryPosts: 6,702
    edited September 2018
    Kyleran said:

    Aeander said:


    Scorchien said:

    LMFAO ... Fortnite is not an MMORPG ..................


    That's because it isn't an RPG. That much really isn't up for debate.

    It could, however, still potentially be a MMOTPS/MMOFPS, as could essentially any other battle royale. It depends on where one draws the line on minimum player count per map to define what is and is not a MMO. We do not have an industry-defined minimum player count per map/server right now, so 100 could very well fit some personal definitions.



    500 per server....go with that figure.....a long accepted but somewhat forgotten standard. Personal definitions are irrelevant.
    By that definion, Guild Wars 2 is not a MMORPG, as map servers soft cap at approx 100 players (no longer auto-match players in) and hard cap (reach max capacity) at about 150-200 (depending on map). 

    So, you'll have to excuse me if I reject the 500 number on those grounds. As far as I'm aware "long accepted but somewhat forgotten standards" aren't the same as official industry definitions. 
  • Shana77Shana77 Member UncommonPosts: 290
    Great article. My two cents are that I enjoyed playing fortnite but just didn't like the building. PUBG looks third rate and buggy, so I still think there is a big market for the first company that captures the fun of fortnite without the building.

    Although I don't think that fortnite is an MMO neccisarily, I do believe some concepts should be "stolen" by mmo's to perhaps bring some much needed fresh air pvp/battlegrounds environments.

    Blizzard made fun of fortnite on april 1 by joking that there would be a battle royale battleground coming to WoW, but why not? Why not do this for real? It would be very interesting to see who would survive the longest although I'm sure it would make their pvp balancing even harder. But there are already so many capture the flag and territory control modes in battlegrounds, I don't see why they shouldn't add a battle royale to spice things up.

    Both Fortnite and Zelda: Breath of the Wild are games that MMO developers should learn from in my opinion.
    Tierless
  • RusqueRusque Member RarePosts: 2,785
    Fortnite is actually facebook in video game form. No one plays it because it's good (it's mediocre at best), but fun with friends and memes makes it burn red hot.

    It's not a sign of good things to come, it's an omen of the looming dark ages of gaming.
    Sensai
  • IselinIselin Member LegendaryPosts: 15,887
    Shana77 said:

    Blizzard made fun of fortnite on april 1 by joking that there would be a battle royale battleground coming to WoW, but why not? Why not do this for real? It would be very interesting to see who would survive the longest although I'm sure it would make their pvp balancing even harder. But there are already so many capture the flag and territory control modes in battlegrounds, I don't see why they shouldn't add a battle royale to spice things up.
    RPGs with character development and different classes are just not suited for this. Fortnite and shooter PvP works because those games are balanced around everyone being the same and that is like the anti-RPG.

    MMORPG PvP works best when it's all about the group and not the individual. I'm much more a DAoC kind of PvPer: large battles with territory capture and control is the type of PvP that works best in MMORPGs.

    If you think PvPers whine about balance and nerfs now, just wait until they do a free for all, last man standing mode.

    But hey, with the Fortnite craze being as big as it is, I'm sure someone will try to add it to an MMORPG to cash in. Probably won't last long though.
    "I don't wait for games. Games wait for me."
    -- CHUCK NORRIS

    “Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” 
    ― CD PROJEKT RED

  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 38,205
    Aeander said:
    Kyleran said:

    Aeander said:


    Scorchien said:

    LMFAO ... Fortnite is not an MMORPG ..................


    That's because it isn't an RPG. That much really isn't up for debate.

    It could, however, still potentially be a MMOTPS/MMOFPS, as could essentially any other battle royale. It depends on where one draws the line on minimum player count per map to define what is and is not a MMO. We do not have an industry-defined minimum player count per map/server right now, so 100 could very well fit some personal definitions.



    500 per server....go with that figure.....a long accepted but somewhat forgotten standard. Personal definitions are irrelevant.
    By that definion, Guild Wars 2 is not a MMORPG, as map servers soft cap at approx 100 players and hard cap at about 150-200 (depending on map). 

    So, you'll have to excuse me if I reject the 500 number, which was never an official industry definition.
    500 per server, not map.

    Mega server tech complicates the situation some but you aren't wrong about GW2.

    I could make a case that many modern MMOs really aren't proper MMORPGs but its already too great a challenge trying to reach agreement on more simple concepts so not worth the effort.

    Again, your rejection is irrelevant.


    Tierless

    "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 ESO - Blackwood at the moment.

    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






  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    Aeander said:
    Scorchien said:
    LMFAO ... Fortnite is not an MMORPG ..................
    That's because it isn't an RPG. That much really isn't up for debate.

    It could, however, still potentially be a MMOTPS/MMOFPS, as could essentially any other battle royale. It depends on where one draws the line on minimum player count per map to define what is and is not a MMO. We do not have an industry-defined minimum player count per map/server right now, so 100 could very well fit some personal definitions.
    I would struggle to accept that without moving the Battlefield franchise into the same genre.
    Kyleran

    image
  • AeanderAeander Member LegendaryPosts: 6,702
    edited September 2018
    Kyleran said:
    Aeander said:
    Kyleran said:

    Aeander said:


    Scorchien said:

    LMFAO ... Fortnite is not an MMORPG ..................


    That's because it isn't an RPG. That much really isn't up for debate.

    It could, however, still potentially be a MMOTPS/MMOFPS, as could essentially any other battle royale. It depends on where one draws the line on minimum player count per map to define what is and is not a MMO. We do not have an industry-defined minimum player count per map/server right now, so 100 could very well fit some personal definitions.



    500 per server....go with that figure.....a long accepted but somewhat forgotten standard. Personal definitions are irrelevant.
    By that definion, Guild Wars 2 is not a MMORPG, as map servers soft cap at approx 100 players and hard cap at about 150-200 (depending on map). 

    So, you'll have to excuse me if I reject the 500 number, which was never an official industry definition.
    500 per server, not map.

    Mega server tech complicates the situation some but you aren't wrong about GW2.

    I could make a case that many modern MMOs really aren't proper MMORPGs but its already too great a challenge trying to reach agreement on more simple concepts so not worth the effort.

    Again, your rejection is irrelevant.


    By what standard and by whose authority? Whose definition is it that you are touting? Did World of Warcraft or Everquest developers specifically lay down the law here? How about Richard Garriot (for all the credibility he has now) with Ultima Online? Did a wise council of industry heads collectively create a definitive list of the exact requirements for a game to constitute a MMORPG? 

    Something tells me that they did not. If they did, this argument wouldn't be so pervasive.

    So, your rejection of my rejection is also irrelevant. That holds until you find actual proof that there is an actual industry standard proposed and agreed upon by actual respected developers. 
    sschruppKyleran
  • RoguewizRoguewiz Member UncommonPosts: 710
    To each their own. I frankly got bored within 2 weeks. Granted, I was hyped about Fortnite early on, but it failed my "expectations"

    Granted, I'm a jaded gamer.

    Raquelis in various games
    Played: Everything
    Playing: World of Warcraft Classic, Stuff
    Wants: The World
    Anticipating: Everquest Next Crowfall, Pantheon

    Tank - Healer - Support: The REAL Trinity
  • sschruppsschrupp Member UncommonPosts: 634






    Nothing wrong with Fortnight. Someone just managed to teach an old dog (First Person Shooters) a new trick. Would I say the game is necessary? I'd say anything that moves the gaming genre forward is necessary. Now what isn't needed? Tons of asshole copy cat companies flooding the market their own half assed knockoffs.


    Well technically Fortnite is the knockoff. 


    Oh they certainly copied Pub G for the battle royale idea, but adding building to the mix makes its quite a bit of a different experience. They actually had an idea how to improve the genre, and did so. And I think that's the reason its kicking Pub G's ass.



    Technically it's a bit opposite in what they did. They took Fortnite (the PvE version that nobody seems to know exists), which is a fun Co-Op game that has building and stuff, and then a couple of the devs said "Hey, what if we added a little battle royale mode just for funsies?". Boom, co-op Fortnite was buried in the sock drawer. The *effect* was an improvement, or addition, to the genre like you say, but their *intent* was to add something to the original Co-Op PvE game as a side project.

    Luckily their little side project ended up bringing them in a TON of extra cash and they haven't stopped developing the PvE Fortnite... yet...
    [Deleted User]Tierless
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    Nothing wrong with Fortnight. Someone just managed to teach an old dog (First Person Shooters) a new trick. Would I say the game is necessary? I'd say anything that moves the gaming genre forward is necessary. Now what isn't needed? Tons of asshole copy cat companies flooding the market their own half assed knockoffs.
    Well technically Fortnite is the knockoff. 
    Oh they certainly copied Pub G for the battle royale idea, but adding building to the mix makes its quite a bit of a different experience. They actually had an idea how to improve the genre, and did so. And I think that's the reason its kicking Pub G's ass.
    Well, that and, much like DayZ, after achieving unexpected success, the creator's efforts to continually update and improve on the formula went into the shitter.

    image
  • MrdGamezMrdGamez Member UncommonPosts: 20
    Don't worry. COD Black OPS 4 will dominate soon and Fortnite will be no more within 5 months Fortnite will be as PUBG is now and no one will care about it anymore.
  • AkulasAkulas Member RarePosts: 2,791
    It's just a FFA shooter at the end of the day which isn't really anything new. All i've done is just played the random game once everynow and then and that's pretty much it.

    This isn't a signature, you just think it is.

  • TheocritusTheocritus Member EpicPosts: 8,442
    Nothing wrong with Fortnight. Someone just managed to teach an old dog (First Person Shooters) a new trick. Would I say the game is necessary? I'd say anything that moves the gaming genre forward is necessary. Now what isn't needed? Tons of asshole copy cat companies flooding the market their own half assed knockoffs.
    Well technically Fortnite is the knockoff. 
    Oh they certainly copied Pub G for the battle royale idea, but adding building to the mix makes its quite a bit of a different experience. They actually had an idea how to improve the genre, and did so. And I think that's the reason its kicking Pub G's ass.
    Building constantly every match would wear me out.
  • WizardryWizardry Member LegendaryPosts: 19,278
    FREE ? lol
    So if you want to have a very small amount of cosmetics in a game ,you have to pay extra ...haha,imagine if that was the case in Wow or any other mmorpg.Let's monetize EVERYTHING,except the login screen...sigh,so many blind people.

    This is just a VERY shallow couple maps game,similar to Overwatch,offers almost nothing,just a login screen and access to pvp within those few maps.Your character looks boring,bland,never changes,yep that is their intent ,bore ev1 intro buying from the cash shop,you know cosmetics because nobody should expect a character to be wearing clothes or have more than a couple weapon choices.

    All aside from the BS,the game plays silly,looks silly,very childish like game play.The animations are awful,the instant building is very non realistic/plausible.

    EPIC has gone way down hill since their early days,i saw the changes when they started adding goofy ideas to Unreal and it showed ,the REAL pro gamer's left Unreal and left Epic gaming.All Epic did here was jump on the bandwagon of the H1Z1's and PUBG's.Those games didn't play like some cartoon playhouse,they more of a mature type,realistic looking games with better physics,Fortnite shot leading looks dumb unless we assume you are shooting rubber bullets in 200 mph winds?

    Ricardo5802bgzgamer

    Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.

  • GeezerGamerGeezerGamer Member EpicPosts: 8,851
    Albatroes said:
    Its just a phase. The only reason this game is getting so much attention is because of the ppl involved, not the actual game itself. Its just like people assuming WoW was at the 'top' cause it was actually good. Most of the reason why wow was at the top was because of how well marketed it was compared to its competition, this is no different. Ninja and celebrities giving him attention is what made Fornite 'good.'
    No, WoW was at the top because it was actually good.
    Kyleran
  • cesmode8cesmode8 Member UncommonPosts: 431
    edited September 2018
    You guys that love Fortnite...all phonies. We wouldnt be talking about fortnite if it stayed the PVE game it was meant to be from the start...you know, that game they took our 50-60 dollar founder purchases and spawned BR from? Shady business tactics.

    My point is, Fortnite wouldnt be a thought on this page or anywhere else if it didnt get lucky with BR. We dont need fortnite because you didnt need it before it made it big either.
    Post edited by cesmode8 on
  • TacticalZombehTacticalZombeh Member UncommonPosts: 397
    edited September 2018

    MrdGamez said:

    Don't worry. COD Black OPS 4 will dominate soon and Fortnite will be no more within 5 months Fortnite will be as PUBG is now and no one will care about it anymore.



    I disagree. Fortnite is too different and its style, love it or hate it, attracts the people who would never consider playing COD.

    What it will most likely take a huge chunk out of is PUBG. BLOPS (I love that acronym, lulz) is just a better PUBG. Runs better, looks better, feels better, plays better. A lot of people wondered what a AAA PUBG would look like and BLOPS4 is pretty much it. The only thing that remains to be seen is what they do with it. More big maps, how will the MTX really play out, etc.

    Now for all that glowy reviewish paragraph, I'll state: I haven't bought a COD since either MW2 or BLOPS1 maybe. Can't stand the multiplayer and the SP campaigns got smaller and smaller.
    Will I be buying BLOPS4? Nope, but I played the Beta and recognize it for what it is: AAA PUBG.

    Activision/Treyarch have a winner... I wonder if they can resist messing it up...
    Post edited by TacticalZombeh on
  • ScotScot Member LegendaryPosts: 15,631
    edited October 2018
    Aeander said:
    Kyleran said:

    Aeander said:


    Scorchien said:

    LMFAO ... Fortnite is not an MMORPG ..................


    That's because it isn't an RPG. That much really isn't up for debate.

    It could, however, still potentially be a MMOTPS/MMOFPS, as could essentially any other battle royale. It depends on where one draws the line on minimum player count per map to define what is and is not a MMO. We do not have an industry-defined minimum player count per map/server right now, so 100 could very well fit some personal definitions.



    500 per server....go with that figure.....a long accepted but somewhat forgotten standard. Personal definitions are irrelevant.
    By that definion, Guild Wars 2 is not a MMORPG, as map servers soft cap at approx 100 players (no longer auto-match players in) and hard cap (reach max capacity) at about 150-200 (depending on map). 

    So, you'll have to excuse me if I reject the 500 number on those grounds. As far as I'm aware "long accepted but somewhat forgotten standards" aren't the same as official industry definitions. 
    It's not a MMORPG, and I don't even look at numbers on servers. :)
    Post edited by Scot on
    AeanderKyleran
  • TierlessTierless ColumnistMember EpicPosts: 3,379


    Games that are popular and for the masses are really a turn off for me.....I'm not even interested in trying it.



    But what if some of them are popular because they are actually good and you are missing out? I mean, Ninja Turtles for example!
    blueturtle13
    But not all men seek rest and peace; some are born with the spirit of the storm in their blood, restless harbingers, knowing no other path.
  • TierlessTierless ColumnistMember EpicPosts: 3,379

    Scorchien said:

    LMFAO ... Fortnite is not an MMORPG ..................



    At this point it’s more of a mmorpg than that dungeon crawler known as WOW.


    Samhael said:

    This article was... different. There were so many dizzying circles and abrupt changes that I really don't have a clue what the author was trying to say except that he liked Fortnite.



    Thanks for reading. My style is an acquired taste but feel free to ask around about me. I assure you I’m one of us.
    blueturtle13TorvalBig.Daddy.Samedi
    But not all men seek rest and peace; some are born with the spirit of the storm in their blood, restless harbingers, knowing no other path.
  • GruugGruug Member RarePosts: 1,761
    I don't care what game someone wants to play UNTIL they tell me I must accept a particular game. I own and have played Fortnite. I haven't played it for a while. Why? It is not my type of game. It is just another shooter with a slightly different "hook". Beyond that, it has no qualities that make it any more fun then any other game. In other words, it made me bored of playing it. So, no amount of "praise" of this game is going to make me say it is the best thing to happen to gaming. It isn't.
    TierlessKyleran

    Let's party like it is 1863!

  • IselinIselin Member LegendaryPosts: 15,887
    TimEisen said:

    Scorchien said:

    LMFAO ... Fortnite is not an MMORPG ..................



    At this point it’s more of a mmorpg than that dungeon crawler known as WOW. 
    Ummm... I'm going to say no... final answer.
    ScorchienScotKyleranBig.Daddy.Samedi
    "I don't wait for games. Games wait for me."
    -- CHUCK NORRIS

    “Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” 
    ― CD PROJEKT RED

  • PhryPhry Member LegendaryPosts: 11,004
    Fortnite is a good BR game, probably the best one currently on the market, but its no MMO, just not enough players involved, its certainly not an MMOFPS, the best example of one of those is currently Planetside 2. Not that it matters that Fortnite isn't an MMO, in its own genre its a huge success, i think it represents the fact that every now and then we need a game to come along that kicks the backsides of other developers to 'push the envelope' just that little bit more.
    The one thing that i find really weird, is that people seem to be arguing in favour of dropping the number of concurrent players for games to be classed as massively multiplayer instead of just multiplayer, when in reality technology is always advancing and the numbers should really be increasing, not shrinking, to keep wanting to drop the numbers is to me indicative of a particularly backwards way of thinking. :/
    ScotOzmodan
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    TimEisen said:

    Scorchien said:

    LMFAO ... Fortnite is not an MMORPG ..................



    At this point it’s more of a mmorpg than that dungeon crawler known as WOW.


    Samhael said:

    This article was... different. There were so many dizzying circles and abrupt changes that I really don't have a clue what the author was trying to say except that he liked Fortnite.



    Thanks for reading. My style is an acquired taste but feel free to ask around about me. I assure you I’m one of us.
    Again, there are implications for shoehorning this into the genre that go beyond a comparison with traditionally labeled MMORPGs.

    Battlefield 5 will even include a 64 player Battle Royale mode.  A difference of 36 players to delineate between multiplayer and massively multiplayer seems...  Insignificant, logically.  Battlefront 2 also had servers running 128 players.  Yet I never see anyone mention that franchise when they try to push a game like Fortnite through the goalposts.

    Maybe that's because the game was released in 2005, before many folks (not you specifically, Tim) decided that MMO meant whatever game they liked and could play online?
    Kyleran

    image
Sign In or Register to comment.