Originally posted by GeezerGamer I think somewhere along the line, the Term MMO has been used interchangeably with the term MOG.
Both WoW and LOL are MOGs, but there is nothing "Massively" about 5-10 people in an instance.
But you can argue that there are tens of thousands if not hundreds logged into the game at any given time. So then how important is it for the title MMO that all these online players be able to interact with each other in the same world?
(And yes, that too is hyperbole...........or is it?)
I disagree. The Term MMO wasn't intended to imply in game instance size. It was to encompass the mass of the server or World. WoW has between 3000-5000 players on any given server at a time. Where as LoL or DotA have a handful on a given server/Match thus that would be a MoG.
The term MMO is not intended for anything. It is just a common label for a group of games, and because of convenience, the industry has been broadening its use.
You can post as many times on forum stating that WoT should be a MoG .. and everyone else will still call it a MMO.
By definition the term MMO is intended to distinguish a category of games from others. For instance, we have co-op, single player, multiplayer, and massively-multiplayer. I hope that helps set things straight for you
And it does ...
WoT, LoL, ... are in the category of MMOs.
Farmville, and CoD do not .... hence WoT, LoL .. as a category is distinguished from another that includes CoD.
Originally posted by Caldrin LoL and WoT are not MMOs... how did they get put into that catagory ?
Yeah, that list is pretty much a fail. They didn't even bother finding out what an MMO was.
Why should they bother? It is more convenient, and it is not like most players care.
"most" players have probably played all three. When you're drawing from the same player base splitting them up doesn't really change which one makes how much and why.
It would be a different story if you're trying to recommend a game to someone and they say I like mobas but hate RPGs
Originally posted by Caldrin LoL and WoT are not MMOs... how did they get put into that catagory ?
Yeah, that list is pretty much a fail. They didn't even bother finding out what an MMO was.
Why should they bother? It is more convenient, and it is not like most players care.
"most" players have probably played all three. When you're drawing from the same player base splitting them up doesn't really change which one makes how much and why.
It would be a different story if you're trying to recommend a game to someone and they say I like mobas but hate RPGs
No it wouldnt .. at that point, you will be recommending specific games .. and any labeling is not going to be used. If i am going to recommend Smite .. then the details matter .. and whether a reviewer called it a MMO is totally irrelevant.
I refuse to take any data seriously if the researcher(s) don't even know what an MMO is. If they can't distinguish the difference between a 10 player game and one with a massive amount of people in it, what else are they struggling with?
Those researchers got a lot of their numbers, information, and categorization directly from the developers and publishers. Their source is a wide berth of industry professionals and actual data direct from the companies.
Are you sure they are the ones struggling with realities of the industry? I think it might be a certain other group wrestling with that particular hurdle.
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
LoL and WoT are not MMOs... how did they get put into that catagory ?
Says who ? The industry seems to have decided they were a long time ago.
And why would we give a FUCK what the 'industry' says what they are?
LOL is not persistent and does not contain more than 10 players on the same map. How that can be categorized as MMO is beyond any common sense.
Because if a lot of people are using their definition, it would be convenient to do so.
Yes, LoL is not persistent and does not conttain more than 10 players on the same map. So is WoT. Since they are classified as MMOs, MMOs no longer need persistent worlds, nor more than 10 players on the same map.
Problem is that developing a small scale pvp game like a MOBA is much easier than a huge mmorpg with a persistant world, pve, pvp, crafting, instanced, open world, etc.
LOL and many FPS's can depend compeltly on their pvp maps alone and generate huge amounts of revenue. Hell, Team Fortress is meantioned. And Crossfire generates huge profits.
And before you even think about harpping on my persistant world comment again Narius, there's different games types from single players, online co-op, persistant world mmos, and many more. Some games mechanics benifit from lobby based with instanced features, while others from traditional mmorpg landmasses. No need to remove one type completly. Variety is the spice of life. Even i need think it'd be nicer to have many current themeparks as online solo gaming with optional multiplayer settings, from 1 friend to public phases. So stop harping on the same issue.
LoL and WoT are not MMOs... how did they get put into that catagory ?
Says who ? The industry seems to have decided they were a long time ago.
And why would we give a FUCK what the 'industry' says what they are?
LOL is not persistent and does not contain more than 10 players on the same map. How that can be categorized as MMO is beyond any common sense.
I don't think anyone does care what you think about it really. It didn't seem to stop them from showing up on the list...probably wont stop it next year either. It doesn't seem to stop developers and publishers from buying the reports.
Maybe if you explain to them how important you are, they'll take more notice ?
Persistence was never actually in the term MMORPG. RPG was though, and notice how that got dropped off when it stopped applying to a lot of games?
Massive is really the key word here that we are fighting over. But how massive were the original MMORPGs? I remember Meridian 59 being packed if 200 players were logged into a server at a time. But that game was completely persistant, non instanced, it had sandbox features including open pvp ,crime system, guild halls, guild wars, political warfare, and even a community elected office with actual power.
Persistent really should have been in the original name. PMORPG would have been a far better name for the genre and alleviated any future confusion.
Hell, even MUD just means Multi User Dungeon... that could apply to dungeon finder in WoW!
Where is MMOExposed with his MSPABCEFGMMORPGZQU or whatever he came up with?
Persistence was never actually in the term MMORPG. RPG was though, and notice how that got dropped off when it stopped applying to a lot of games?
Massive is really the key word here that we are fighting over. But how massive were the original MMORPGs? I remember Meridian 59 being packed if 200 players were logged into a server at a time. But that game was completely persistant, non instanced, it had sandbox features including open pvp ,crime system, guild halls, guild wars, political warfare, and even a community elected office with actual power.
Persistent really should have been in the original name. PMORPG would have been a far better name for the genre and alleviated any future confusion.
Hell, even MUD just means Multi User Dungeon... that could apply to dungeon finder in WoW!
Where is MMOExposed with his MSPABCEFGMMORPGZQU or whatever he came up with?
I think the point is that MMORPGs are not important enough for people to spend the time to come up with the correct description, or enough sub-categories to be accurate.
They are just online games that sort of nice to be in the same category. Hence, it got shorten and broaden .. just to be convenient. And obviously some of the characteristics (like persistency and massiveness) are not important enough for people to be accurate on.
It says top game sales, LoL is free, so do they mean only cash shop revenue, which is usually what that site tracks?
If that is the case, I doubt they beat WoW, and no I am not a WoW fanboi that would be worried about WoW, asI only played the beta and never played beyond that.
I just don't find this reporting site to be that great for information, they tend to be very vague on things and what they are or aren't considering a type of game, or what they are counting....Well at least at a glance, and no I am not paying to get more information (if I remember correctly, you need to do that, last time I tried).
Everything is a mmo, according to this stuff, they have stuff being a social game too, but with the standards used, I find that to be a little of a poor barrier/category. Using the term mmo, mmorpg, social game, is all useless anymore. You have to tack on even more acronyms or words to dfein what you are talking about.
I found it easier to know what people are talking about or discuss/classify things before the new everything is the same revolution myself, instead of the opposite. People use to not even consider GW1 a mmo, close, but most did not, when it was new, as it was a little too instanced. Now stuff that makes GW1 seem like the most massive and open mmo ever is a mmo.
So if you can track, interact or play with more than 1 person, you are a mmo imo, makes it easier. Farmville, Candy Crush, Castle Age, Poker are all mmos, I am getting ahead of the curve. Hell, even these forums.
LoL and WoT are not MMOs... how did they get put into that catagory ?
Says who ? The industry seems to have decided they were a long time ago.
their website? LoL's page clearly says MOBA.
So? Even this site listed them as MMO. It is just common usage.
Where. Show me.
League of Legends is actually listed as a MOBA on this site, but hey, why let that get in the way of the movement, if you say it is listed as a MMO, it makes a better point.
MOBA | Genre: Fantasy | Status: Final (rel 10/27/09) | Pub: Riot Games
Now look up say, Everquest and click on the symbol, and it lists MMORPG where MOBA is on LoL.
I actually heard this so much, figured it was actually listed as such, but guess not. It may pull up under the one category, which just pulls anything on the site up, but it kind of shoots a hole in saying it is listed as such.
Doesn't mean much anymore, as the naming is all screwy, anyway.
Edit: D3 is listed as a Action RPG. WoT as a MMORTP I think it said, so it is listed as a MMO on the site.
LoL and WoT are not MMOs... how did they get put into that catagory ?
Says who ? The industry seems to have decided they were a long time ago.
And why would we give a FUCK what the 'industry' says what they are?
LOL is not persistent and does not contain more than 10 players on the same map. How that can be categorized as MMO is beyond any common sense.
Because if a lot of people are using their definition, it would be convenient to do so.
Yes, LoL is not persistent and does not conttain more than 10 players on the same map. So is WoT. Since they are classified as MMOs, MMOs no longer need persistent worlds, nor more than 10 players on the same map.
Common usage trumps common sense .. obviously.
I have not seen anything that proves that a lot of people are calling LoL an MMO. Some vocal people are doing it for whatever agenda they have (such as trying to get more sales) and the conformists quickly fall inline, but those with common sense will not and I do believe there are more people in the latter category than the former.
MMO = Massive Multiplayer Online , a lot of games fall into this catagory, why is this a problem for so many?
The first M stands for Massively, not Massive.
Also, the reason why this is a problem is because if every game that offers an online component would be called an MMO then almost every multiplayer game would be an MMO and the category would lose it's meaning and hence be pointless. There would be no distinction between a multiplayer game and a massively multiplayer game. So why even then have the latter?
It is simply a marketing ploy. They want to pretend it is an MMO to get more sales. It is like calling a regular car a luxury car, even if it isn't.
Comments
I agree - mmo is more a buzzword than anything else
it's a "one size fits all" label
EQ2 fan sites
And it does ...
WoT, LoL, ... are in the category of MMOs.
Farmville, and CoD do not .... hence WoT, LoL .. as a category is distinguished from another that includes CoD.
Why should they bother? It is more convenient, and it is not like most players care.
"most" players have probably played all three. When you're drawing from the same player base splitting them up doesn't really change which one makes how much and why.
It would be a different story if you're trying to recommend a game to someone and they say I like mobas but hate RPGs
No it wouldnt .. at that point, you will be recommending specific games .. and any labeling is not going to be used. If i am going to recommend Smite .. then the details matter .. and whether a reviewer called it a MMO is totally irrelevant.
With shared online leagues, why the hell not?
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
When I went to that website it all explained it's outcome. Seeing the company's they (SearchDate) works with explains the full listing.
Companies we work with
yeah .. the term means whatever a large population and the industry want it to mean. Nothing more and nothing less.
Those researchers got a lot of their numbers, information, and categorization directly from the developers and publishers. Their source is a wide berth of industry professionals and actual data direct from the companies.
Are you sure they are the ones struggling with realities of the industry? I think it might be a certain other group wrestling with that particular hurdle.
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
And why would we give a FUCK what the 'industry' says what they are?
LOL is not persistent and does not contain more than 10 players on the same map. How that can be categorized as MMO is beyond any common sense.
My gaming blog
Because if a lot of people are using their definition, it would be convenient to do so.
Yes, LoL is not persistent and does not conttain more than 10 players on the same map. So is WoT. Since they are classified as MMOs, MMOs no longer need persistent worlds, nor more than 10 players on the same map.
Common usage trumps common sense .. obviously.
Problem is that developing a small scale pvp game like a MOBA is much easier than a huge mmorpg with a persistant world, pve, pvp, crafting, instanced, open world, etc.
LOL and many FPS's can depend compeltly on their pvp maps alone and generate huge amounts of revenue. Hell, Team Fortress is meantioned. And Crossfire generates huge profits.
And before you even think about harpping on my persistant world comment again Narius, there's different games types from single players, online co-op, persistant world mmos, and many more. Some games mechanics benifit from lobby based with instanced features, while others from traditional mmorpg landmasses. No need to remove one type completly. Variety is the spice of life. Even i need think it'd be nicer to have many current themeparks as online solo gaming with optional multiplayer settings, from 1 friend to public phases. So stop harping on the same issue.
I don't think anyone does care what you think about it really. It didn't seem to stop them from showing up on the list...probably wont stop it next year either. It doesn't seem to stop developers and publishers from buying the reports.
Maybe if you explain to them how important you are, they'll take more notice ?
Persistence was never actually in the term MMORPG. RPG was though, and notice how that got dropped off when it stopped applying to a lot of games?
Massive is really the key word here that we are fighting over. But how massive were the original MMORPGs? I remember Meridian 59 being packed if 200 players were logged into a server at a time. But that game was completely persistant, non instanced, it had sandbox features including open pvp ,crime system, guild halls, guild wars, political warfare, and even a community elected office with actual power.
Persistent really should have been in the original name. PMORPG would have been a far better name for the genre and alleviated any future confusion.
Hell, even MUD just means Multi User Dungeon... that could apply to dungeon finder in WoW!
Where is MMOExposed with his MSPABCEFGMMORPGZQU or whatever he came up with?
I think the point is that MMORPGs are not important enough for people to spend the time to come up with the correct description, or enough sub-categories to be accurate.
They are just online games that sort of nice to be in the same category. Hence, it got shorten and broaden .. just to be convenient. And obviously some of the characteristics (like persistency and massiveness) are not important enough for people to be accurate on.
It says top game sales, LoL is free, so do they mean only cash shop revenue, which is usually what that site tracks?
If that is the case, I doubt they beat WoW, and no I am not a WoW fanboi that would be worried about WoW, asI only played the beta and never played beyond that.
I just don't find this reporting site to be that great for information, they tend to be very vague on things and what they are or aren't considering a type of game, or what they are counting....Well at least at a glance, and no I am not paying to get more information (if I remember correctly, you need to do that, last time I tried).
Everything is a mmo, according to this stuff, they have stuff being a social game too, but with the standards used, I find that to be a little of a poor barrier/category. Using the term mmo, mmorpg, social game, is all useless anymore. You have to tack on even more acronyms or words to dfein what you are talking about.
I found it easier to know what people are talking about or discuss/classify things before the new everything is the same revolution myself, instead of the opposite. People use to not even consider GW1 a mmo, close, but most did not, when it was new, as it was a little too instanced. Now stuff that makes GW1 seem like the most massive and open mmo ever is a mmo.
So if you can track, interact or play with more than 1 person, you are a mmo imo, makes it easier. Farmville, Candy Crush, Castle Age, Poker are all mmos, I am getting ahead of the curve. Hell, even these forums.
Right here ...
http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm
See the big title on the top ...
"MMORPG Gamelist - All MMO Games"
scroll down to the "l" section and you will see .. yes, you guess it .. "league of legends".
League of Legends is actually listed as a MOBA on this site, but hey, why let that get in the way of the movement, if you say it is listed as a MMO, it makes a better point.
Click on the link for it, and the information for it, and the first thing listed is MOBA.
MMO = Massive Multiplayer Online , a lot of games fall into this catagory, why is this a problem for so many?
MOBA | Genre: Fantasy | Status: Final (rel 10/27/09) | Pub: Riot Games
Now look up say, Everquest and click on the symbol, and it lists MMORPG where MOBA is on LoL.
I actually heard this so much, figured it was actually listed as such, but guess not. It may pull up under the one category, which just pulls anything on the site up, but it kind of shoots a hole in saying it is listed as such.
Doesn't mean much anymore, as the naming is all screwy, anyway.
Edit: D3 is listed as a Action RPG. WoT as a MMORTP I think it said, so it is listed as a MMO on the site.
Why does that mean it's not considered an mmo ?
No one is saying moba isn't a game type, they're saying mmo is a larger classification of games that also encompass mobas.
I guess the easier way to do it would be to call them mmoba ( like mmorpg ) but really it doesn't matter.
I have not seen anything that proves that a lot of people are calling LoL an MMO. Some vocal people are doing it for whatever agenda they have (such as trying to get more sales) and the conformists quickly fall inline, but those with common sense will not and I do believe there are more people in the latter category than the former.
My gaming blog
The first M stands for Massively, not Massive.
Also, the reason why this is a problem is because if every game that offers an online component would be called an MMO then almost every multiplayer game would be an MMO and the category would lose it's meaning and hence be pointless. There would be no distinction between a multiplayer game and a massively multiplayer game. So why even then have the latter?
It is simply a marketing ploy. They want to pretend it is an MMO to get more sales. It is like calling a regular car a luxury car, even if it isn't.
My gaming blog