wait, were calling BDO a sandbox game now? i mean, sorta i guess.
have to agree with most that some of these games are not what the traditional definition of 'MMO' is, but at this point i think its no longer an acronym and instead just used to define any type of online game.
That is probably true. However, I believe that is why it should be changed to something else. The term "massive" doesn't really devolve very well and should be replaced by "multi player".
I have zero problem with the article or the games on it. I just think the term needs to "evolve" to be more inclusive.. I guess is the way to word it. In general the word "inclusive" makes me cringe.. however, I read about a lot of games on here I wouldn't normally have played... that just don't fit the traditional "mmo" definition and I don't think this is something that needs to be... complicated.
"Sure enough, there weren’t many great new games to play in 2017."
Well I am not sure it is a good idea to vote a MMO in its first year as best MMO anyway, give it a year to mature. But the word "games" was used, rather indicating the list leans to online multiplayer.
And so I continue it...
There are rather a lot of Not So MMO (etc) on the list. I am not sure why MMO players or columnists should be getting caught up in the "Battle Royale mode craze". It is a mode, not the second coming. Warframe for example is described by its company as "A third-person, co-op focused action game" I guess co-op is all that's needed now for the word "MMO" to be dropped on it like an elephant in the lobby.
The actual MMOs picked were a good balanced selection, well thought out. Diversity in MMOs; their play styles, lore, themes and graphics is what makes for a strong genre and that's what the list shows.
the only good thing i can say about the 10"best" MMO`S is that some of the better ones are free.
the devcelopers make very boring average games i believe they will release amazing games as soon as you agree to plant a chip in your brain then you are a total slave in any case,like the Borg in star trek thats their goal;)
And so , change the title ! "The 10 Best Mix Games of 2017"
Reporter: What's behind Blizzard success, and how do you make your gamers happy? Blizzard Boss: Making gamers happy is not my concern, making money.. yes!
“In no particular order, here are our 10 Best MMOs of 2017. Note, not all of these are MMORPG’s, but rather prime examples of the changing landscape of persistent online games.”
Try to be excellent to everyone you meet. You never know what someone else has seen or endured.
The problem is it takes away spots from perhaps other deserving MMORPGs.
This isn't even a list selected from MMOs that launched in 2017, which would make including the above understandable.
There are hundreds of extant honest-to-goodness MMORPGs; you could have literally rolled the dice a few times and come up with a better list of "best MMOs of 2017".
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
“In no particular order, here are our 10 Best MMOs of 2017. Note, not all of these are MMORPG’s, but rather prime examples of the changing landscape of persistent online games.”
“In no particular order, here are our 10 Best MMOs of 2017. Note, not all of these are MMORPG’s, but rather prime examples of the changing landscape of persistent online games.”
Then just change the list to 10 best Multiplayer Online games.
Sort of like making a list 10 best sports cars - but then saying "note not all of these are cars - some are bicycles and there's a pair of running shoes in the list too"
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.
and 6 others.
Try to be excellent to everyone you meet. You never know what someone else has seen or endured.
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.
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.
and 9 others.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
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
But what difference does it make how many thousands are on the server if instances only manage up to dozens?
that is actually my issue with most mmo's and why i dont even consider most themepark mmo's worthy of being called massively.
o yay all these people on the servers but no good reason or way to interact with more than a few at any one time.
I guess the staff here, between changing the site's name or the genre's definition, decided to do the latter. Considering it is rather impossible to purchase mog.com, it makes sense.
I don't agree with them, but I understand them.
Unless they're all wasted and toasted. Then I'd understand them even more!
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
*A persistent world
*Large numbers of people in the same digital space
*Progression
*Role-playing
roleplaying actually is not required for an mmo, but an mmorpg, which obviously is a sub of mmos...
DC universe is fine, but warframe is not? warframe has raids too, you know? and relays, where a large number of people actually can meet, in a persistent world, and even roleplay!
and quite frankly, i saw alot more players in warframe than i saw during playing DCUO
and guess what, warframe has by farm more progression than most "allowed by mmorpg.com users"-mmos.
i dont think you actually understood HOW HEAVY those "mmos" you concider to be mmos already focus on instancing their world, especially old republic
some instance games seem to be okai for you, others not, why is that? personal opinion? after that all high and mighty text you just threw out here? tststs
game terms change over time, get used to it, saves you alot of rage
"I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up! Not me!"
I am a bit confused what an MMO is today and how its meaning has changed,
i mean some of these games have large numbers of players online at one time but not in a constant world, more of a lobby/que game, to me that's just a multiplayer game.
Is it an MMO because there are more then 10 players online now? I remember playing games like Quake/Unreal Tournament MP that had more then that and it was not considered an MMO.
Anyway, I am not putting this story down, I am not agreeing or disagreeing with it, I am just asking what criteria is needed for a game to be considered an MMO today.
*A persistent world
*Large numbers of people in the same digital space
*Progression
*Role-playing
roleplaying actually is not required for an mmo, but an mmorpg, which obviously is a sub of mmos...
DC universe is fine, but warframe is not? warframe has raids too, you know? and relays, where a large number of people actually can meet, in a persistent world, and even roleplay!
and quite frankly, i saw alot more players in warframe than i saw during playing DCUO
and guess what, warframe has by farm more progression than most "allowed by mmorpg.com users"-mmos.
i dont think you actually understood HOW HEAVY those "mmos" you concider to be mmos already focus on instancing their world, especially old republic
some instance games seem to be okai for you, others not, why is that? personal opinion? after that all high and mighty text you just threw out here? tststs
game terms change over time, get used to it, saves you alot of rage
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Warframe lacks a persistent world which is... a pretty basic defining feature of the MMORPG genre? By "persistence" I mean the world continues to exist (and change) whether or not you are logged in. The degree to which meaningful change occurs is another discussion to be had, but at least there are a great number of games that are trying.
Any rage you ascribe to me is of your own perception. I'm quite calm, actually.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
Comments
That is probably true. However, I believe that is why it should be changed to something else. The term "massive" doesn't really devolve very well and should be replaced by "multi player".
I have zero problem with the article or the games on it. I just think the term needs to "evolve" to be more inclusive.. I guess is the way to word it. In general the word "inclusive" makes me cringe.. however, I read about a lot of games on here I wouldn't normally have played... that just don't fit the traditional "mmo" definition and I don't think this is something that needs to be... complicated.
So.. if the article had said MMO of the year goes to Fortnite you think that would have been OK?
Well I am not sure it is a good idea to vote a MMO in its first year as best MMO anyway, give it a year to mature. But the word "games" was used, rather indicating the list leans to online multiplayer.
And so I continue it...
There are rather a lot of Not So MMO (etc) on the list. I am not sure why MMO players or columnists should be getting caught up in the "Battle Royale mode craze". It is a mode, not the second coming. Warframe for example is described by its company as "A third-person, co-op focused action game" I guess co-op is all that's needed now for the word "MMO" to be dropped on it like an elephant in the lobby.
The actual MMOs picked were a good balanced selection, well thought out. Diversity in MMOs; their play styles, lore, themes and graphics is what makes for a strong genre and that's what the list shows.
This isn't a signature, you just think it is.
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
"I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up! Not me!"
the devcelopers make very boring average games i believe they will release amazing games as soon as you agree to plant a chip in your brain then you are a total slave in any case,like the Borg in star trek thats their goal;)
And so , change the title ! "The 10 Best Mix Games of 2017"
Reporter: What's behind Blizzard success, and how do you make your gamers happy?
Blizzard Boss: Making gamers happy is not my concern, making money.. yes!
Try to be excellent to everyone you meet. You never know what someone else has seen or endured.
My Review Manifesto
Follow me on Twitter if you dare.
Not to mention PoE.
The problem is it takes away spots from perhaps other deserving MMORPGs.
This isn't even a list selected from MMOs that launched in 2017, which would make including the above understandable.
There are hundreds of extant honest-to-goodness MMORPGs; you could have literally rolled the dice a few times and come up with a better list of "best MMOs of 2017".
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
huh?
Try to be excellent to everyone you meet. You never know what someone else has seen or endured.
My Review Manifesto
Follow me on Twitter if you dare.
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.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
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.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
that is actually my issue with most mmo's and why i dont even consider most themepark mmo's worthy of being called massively.
o yay all these people on the servers but no good reason or way to interact with more than a few at any one time.
I don't agree with them, but I understand them.
Unless they're all wasted and toasted. Then I'd understand them even more!
*Large numbers of people in the same digital space
*Progression
*Role-playing
roleplaying actually is not required for an mmo, but an mmorpg, which obviously is a sub of mmos...
DC universe is fine, but warframe is not? warframe has raids too, you know? and relays, where a large number of people actually can meet, in a persistent world, and even roleplay!
and quite frankly, i saw alot more players in warframe than i saw during playing DCUO
and guess what, warframe has by farm more progression than most "allowed by mmorpg.com users"-mmos.
i dont think you actually understood HOW HEAVY those "mmos" you concider to be mmos already focus on instancing their world, especially old republic
some instance games seem to be okai for you, others not, why is that? personal opinion? after that all high and mighty text you just threw out here? tststs
game terms change over time, get used to it, saves you alot of rage
"I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up! Not me!"
i mean some of these games have large numbers of players online at one time but not in a constant world, more of a lobby/que game, to me that's just a multiplayer game.
Is it an MMO because there are more then 10 players online now? I remember playing games like Quake/Unreal Tournament MP that had more then that and it was not considered an MMO.
Anyway, I am not putting this story down, I am not agreeing or disagreeing with it, I am just asking what criteria is needed for a game to be considered an MMO today.
Any rage you ascribe to me is of your own perception. I'm quite calm, actually.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance