I would urge you all to define MMO as in, possible number of player on screen at the same time, And like many others, I would define several hundreds (eg. 200+) as massive, which, regrettably, many modern online games fail to achieve.
Otherwise, I would be so bold as to make the claim that Street Fighter is an mmo, as it fulfills all required conditions to make it so.
Otherwise, I would be so bold as to make the claim that Street Fighter is an mmo, as it fulfills all required conditions to make it so.
If websites do call SF a MMO, i have no issue with it. It is just 3 letters representing a group of games. It is not like the genre label is crucial to whether a game is fun or not.
Otherwise, I would be so bold as to make the claim that Street Fighter is an mmo, as it fulfills all required conditions to make it so.
If websites do call SF a MMO, i have no issue with it. It is just 3 letters representing a group of games. It is not like the genre label is crucial to whether a game is fun or not.
No one ever said that whether a game is fun or not is dependent in any way on it's classification. That is.....hmmm, lol, yeah, it's only you who even brings it up.
If you don't have an issue though with a website calling Street Fighter an MMO than that is just beyond foolish. At that point all classification should be done with and we just start calling the whole shebang "games".
[mod edit]
Post edited by Amana on
"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
You don't need arbitrary numbers to define what constitutes an mmo.
MMO = high amount of players interacting with eachother. Emphasis on with. Games like LoL/WoT are not MMOs because despite them having millions of players you are never interacting with more than 5-10 players at once in your match.
Any game with a mainly persistant world (where the main content is not lobby based), persistant evolution (your progress carries over playing sessions) and having players co-operating and competing with eachother at the same time is worth calling an MMO for me. Thesedays, even browser games are more worthy of the title than a lot of supposed 'single player simulators' out there.
Its simple the first M stands for massive which represents the number of people in the world, not online. Obviously with the numbers you have chosen we are automatically disqualifiying the stuff that is often mislabeled as mmos by kids (LoL, WoT, Diablo, etc).
Arbitrary number is dumb but I guess I wouldn't feel comfortable calling a 64 player bf server a mmo, but would feel less troubled calling a 128 one since that is more players interacting together than most mmos.
Now if we are talking about pure mmorpgs & planetside 2 (if people disagree about fps with servers but huge numbers to participate) then not only must there be at least 100+ people to gather somewhere but also to do it in a majority of the world. I say this because some people will argue that even a game like wow isn't a mmo because the majority of the game happens in instances and will call the city hubs glorified lobies, it is still possible to do events in all parts of the world where massive numbers can gather.
Its simple the first M stands for massive which represents the number of people in the world, not online. Obviously with the numbers you have chosen we are automatically disqualifiying the stuff that is often mislabeled as mmos by kids (LoL, WoT, Diablo, etc).
Arbitrary number is dumb but I guess I wouldn't feel comfortable calling a 64 player bf server a mmo, but would feel less troubled calling a 128 one since that is more players interacting together than most mmos.
Now if we are talking about pure mmorpgs & planetside 2 (if people disagree about fps with servers but huge numbers to participate) then not only must there be at least 100+ people to gather somewhere but also to do it in a majority of the world. I say this because some people will argue that even a game like wow isn't a mmo because the majority of the game happens in instances and will call the city hubs glorified lobies, it is still possible to do events in all parts of the world where massive numbers can gather.
Pretty clear the first letter represents "Minimally" at least by sites such as this one.
We who know better carry the fight for accuracy forward.
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
Comments
And like many others, I would define several hundreds (eg. 200+) as massive,
which, regrettably, many modern online games fail to achieve.
Otherwise, I would be so bold as to make the claim that Street Fighter is an mmo, as it fulfills all required conditions to make it so.
If you don't have an issue though with a website calling Street Fighter an MMO than that is just beyond foolish. At that point all classification should be done with and we just start calling the whole shebang "games".
[mod edit]
"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
MMO = high amount of players interacting with eachother. Emphasis on with. Games like LoL/WoT are not MMOs because despite them having millions of players you are never interacting with more than 5-10 players at once in your match.
Any game with a mainly persistant world (where the main content is not lobby based), persistant evolution (your progress carries over playing sessions) and having players co-operating and competing with eachother at the same time is worth calling an MMO for me. Thesedays, even browser games are more worthy of the title than a lot of supposed 'single player simulators' out there.
Arbitrary number is dumb but I guess I wouldn't feel comfortable calling a 64 player bf server a mmo, but would feel less troubled calling a 128 one since that is more players interacting together than most mmos.
Now if we are talking about pure mmorpgs & planetside 2 (if people disagree about fps with servers but huge numbers to participate) then not only must there be at least 100+ people to gather somewhere but also to do it in a majority of the world. I say this because some people will argue that even a game like wow isn't a mmo because the majority of the game happens in instances and will call the city hubs glorified lobies, it is still possible to do events in all parts of the world where massive numbers can gather.
We who know better carry the fight for accuracy forward.
"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
In fact, i like it so much .. i will use MMO, defined as "minimally multiplayer online" games .. not that I wasn't already doing so.