I'm not sure why mmorpg.com hasn't put this game on their list yet.
Well, if I had to guess, it fails this test: "500 or more simultaneous players in one world."
Yes, I know, GW and PSU probably fail as well, but I think they got on the site before the above rule was established (in fact, they were probably the reason the rule was created) so they get to stay.
500 or more players in one world...
as in, one server, or one zone. there is a difference.
most MMOs do not have more than 500 people in one zone. Nor could their servers handle it if it happened. Only a handful of MMOs such as WoW have a "seamless" world where loading new zones happens behind the scenes. And only a game like EvE has been challenged to have a single zone accommodate 500+ players.
In the end, if this site requires 500 people in 1 server, then HGL passes. If it requires 500 people in a single zone, than half the games on this site would fail.
Whether it's listed here or not, I'll be playing it.
The real nextgen in online RPGs is a game that is actually fun and not a boring: walk, search for group, or push button to craft fest. Actual game play in a game, very innovative. (And yes I was making fun of WoW)
Personally I agree that if Guildwars and Dungeon Runners is listed on here then there really isn't a reason why not to list HG:L.
I just dumped my Fury and Tabula Rasa preorders for HG:L.
Greetings
And here i think you nail the proplem that there is with the definations that keeps HG:L out. There is really alot off people looking for multiplayer online games, comparing different ones on this site, that actual could enjoy having HG:L in the list. its the "massive" part of MMORPG that is creating the trouble!
i don't think the 500 players in one grafical area qualify as a very good way to seperate what is "massive". Simply because most MMORPGs is outright not playable if that many players comes together! And keeping games out because developers have taken responsibility for that, and set boundries to keep performance high, does not make sense to me. Especial if these game in alot of other ways cowers the aspect of being "Massive". As HG:L does, as Guild WARS does.
I personal feels this site lacks quality by not having HGL in. And if Guild Wars was not here as an exsample of that not all MORPG has to be with a monthly fee, then this site again would lack alot imho.
i think this is a case where the sites admins could look at if the rules serves the site! I personally would like to know if the admins think the rule is fine or think thats "its the least bad rule " that we could come up with. Because there is so many people that want's HG:L in here, and if its just because 1 rule that arguable not serves its purpose in the best way, then change the rule!
Yo guys! After consideration, we do not believe that Hellgate: London meets our requirements as an MMORPG. While it is online, it is not a massively multiplayer online game. For more information, please check out our list on what qualifies a game as an MMORPG.
Yo guys! After consideration, we do not believe that Hellgate: London meets our requirements as an MMORPG. While it is online, it is not a massively multiplayer online game. For more information, please check out our list on what qualifies a game as an MMORPG.
Laura "Taera" Genender
Community Manager
MMORPG.com
And that have been linked already, and thats why the 500 in area topic, is now being discussed as its the one where HG:L falls out.
I would need to agree that it's not an MMO. At least, no more than Diablo 2 is an MMO. The multiplayer is exactly the same, only with the option of a subscription program that gets you extra content.
From my understanding HG:L and Guild Wars are definitely MMORPGs. I have also played Guild Wars and can confirm it.
Massively Multiplayer Online Role playing games.
So our definition of an MMORPG rests on solely what "massive" means. 500 on a server? Guild Wars passes. Im sure the HG:L servers will be able to handle at least 500 people per.
Now people bring up Diablo 2, quite frankly I was wondering why that wasn't here either. You have hundreds and hundreds of people playing simultaneously, you join up to do an instanced copy of the game.
___________________ Sadly, I see storm clouds on the horizon. A faint stench of Vanguard is in the air.-Kien
Originally posted by Kordesh I would need to agree that it's not an MMO. At least, no more than Diablo 2 is an MMO. The multiplayer is exactly the same, only with the option of a subscription program that gets you extra content.
Why does this notion keep getting repeated here when it is refuted over and over? Not picking on you Kordesh, just using your post as an example.
The game is no different than DDO, or GW. It's not a chat lobby you log into find some people to go questing with and then off to the "game" when you hit start. It's not like Diablo 2. The "rules" that have been set forth on more than one occasion here have been answered already by someone, that actually shows the game fits the criteria.
Two glaring misconceptions that I see over and over in this thread are:
1. "Just like Diablo 2, not an MMO" - This isn't true. If your going to allow for games like GW or DDO or Dungeon Runners to exist in the lists, then you really can't deny HG:L to rank up there as they are set up in the same way, at least in how the persistant world is ran.
2. "Subscription based" - It isn't p2p. It IS free 100% to anyone (after purchasing the retail box). You DO have the option to pay for added content, perks, etc. This is no different than countless other games on here (alot of them total tish IMO). At least the poster I quoted gets this much of it right, in that paying is an "Option".
I see some that say it's a single player game with some multiplayer capabilities (ala Diablo), well it's really more like two things at once. There IS a single player game you get when you buy it. There is also a multiplayer portion of it though as well, seperate from the singleplayer portion. I remember AoC was supposed to have something like this, does that mean it isn't qualified any longer?
HG:L was designed to have a very robust online existence, the devs have stated this. Hellgate doesn't do anything more or less than DDO or GW does. There is more than "one" city for players to mingle in from what I understand as well.
You have alot of people who would like to see Hellgate get a listing here, why not look into it yourselves MMORPG.COM and find out if it qualifies? Although I think if you actually "deny" it from being listable, then you risk some credibility by allowing many of the aformentioned games...
just my 2cents...Either way I look forward to this game with or without this sites "approval" =P
I would need to agree that it's not an MMO. At least, no more than Diablo 2 is an MMO. The multiplayer is exactly the same, only with the option of a subscription program that gets you extra content.
Actually, that's not accurate.
In Diablo II, there was no common area for players outside of those chat rooms. Guild Wars differed from this model (and it considered a MMO by many) because the towns were actual in-game gathering locations for players, even if leaving town resulted in an instanced experience. Hellgate: London works the same way, with hundreds is not thousands of plyers usng common town locations in-between leaving on instanced adventures/dungeons.
I personally would title this a MMORPG, one that also offers a single-player model, in addition to an enhanced subscription-based model.
I dont know much about Hellgate yet, but maybe it doesnt meet a few of the "unmentioned" MMO requirments. 1)Must have extremely slow, boring gameplay. 2) Must pretend to be an RPG. 3) Must have massive, repetitive grinds. 4) Must look, play, and feel exactly the same as every other MMO.
(Going of the WoW model)
For ever hour played a half hour must be spent walking from one place to another with no action what so ever.
For every hour played 10 minutes must be spent hitting one button over and over to level up a trade skill.
For every hour played 10 minutes must be spent looking for a group.
For the 10 minutes that you are actually in combat, that combat must be no risk, auto aim and boring.
I dont know much about Hellgate yet, but maybe it doesnt meet a few of the "unmentioned" MMO requirments. 1)Must have extremely slow, boring gameplay. 2) Must pretend to be an RPG. 3) Must have massive, repetitive grinds. 4) Must look, play, and feel exactly the same as every other MMO.
I agree that Hellgate deserves serious consideration. While it's status as a true MMORPG might be in question, I think the target audience largely matches the readers of this website/forum. I'm sure plenty of people here would be interested in talking about/reviewing/flaming this game.
But I'm now taking a quick look through their website and I don't see the term 'MMORPG' anywhere. How are the developers categorizing their own game?
Yo guys! After consideration, we do not believe that Hellgate: London meets our requirements as an MMORPG. While it is online, it is not a massively multiplayer online game. For more information, please check out our list on what qualifies a game as an MMORPG.
Laura "Taera" Genender Community Manager MMORPG.com
Further down in the same thread
Hang tight guys, we're looking into it
Laura "Taera" Genender Community Manager MMORPG.com
So it seems that they finally might be reconsidering having Hellgate listed
I was asking for it since... a long time. in fact i was in alpha and now in beta, it strictly need to be listed here (not less than Dungeon Runner if you see what i mean). NDA now...
I would need to agree that it's not an MMO. At least, no more than Diablo 2 is an MMO. The multiplayer is exactly the same, only with the option of a subscription program that gets you extra content.
no, i suggest you all take a quick read here. From what im grasping out of it is, that there is a Single player and a free multiplayer that are linked, then there is the payed online that gets updated and is a different charicter, aka phantasy star esc.
"After the game's initial purchase, Hellgate: London's single-player campaign can be played either for free or upgraded to an Elite subscription account at $9.95 per month, which confers MMOG functionality to the title. It is rated M for Mature and goes on sale October 31."- Gamespot News blog
Can't we all just agree that it's a online multiplayer action RPG. And that MMOPRG.com can expand just a tad out of it's MMO box. Does everything on MMORPG.com have to be a classic MMO?
It's an RPG. It's multiplayer. It's persistent. It's online. Isn't that enough? Who cares if its not an MMO. Just because the site is called MMORPG, just seems too nitpicky to me.
Out of all the general gaming forums I go to (about 5 of them) There are more Hellgate threads on MMORPG than any other non-hellate specific site. So whether it's a MMO or not, people here are into it – that's what counts.
It has the exact same aspects as guild wars. It should be on here if guild wars is. Period. It has hubs, just like guild wars. You go out into instanced areas with a small number of people, just like guild wars. I would say it is more of an MMO then guild wars is, as there is actual character development in the game rather then maxing out really fast (or just getting 20 right at the start with a pvp character) and spam changing your spec in town. Character customization is a lot deeper (like it should be in an MMO) then it is in guild wars in skill trees as well as gear choices. If anything, Hellgate London should be on here and not Guild Wars.
Massive - means big, in this context it is modifying "multiplayer" to create a specific definition which is "a great many players" but is commonly defined as meaning "many thousands"
Multiplayer - it's latin, roughly translates as (more than one player)
Online - using the internet.
Role-Playing - when one accepts the persona of another.
Game - a thing to be played. singular.
Okay, now that we have our definitions, let's apply them to Guild Wars (which will be refered to as GW in the equation below)
if GW is a Game
If GW contains Role-Playing
If GW uses the internet
If GW accepts more than one player and is considered "multiplayer"
If GW is massive
Then GW = MMORPG.
Like it or not, there is no regularly scheduled update (patch) or fee (subscription) requirements to be considered an MMORPG. All you need is a lot of people accepting the role of another, playing over the internet together in a single game.
Summary: Guild Wars is an MMORPG, and while not a Subscription-based MMORPG nor a TradMMORPG, it is still an MMORPG.
Follow the above formula, plug in Hellgate: London... Implovers' simplistic mmorpg formula ftw?
Comments
its hard not to compare an action rpg to another action rpg. even more so when they are from the mind of the same person (bill roper).
they are a lot alike (diablo and hellgate london). demons, check. action rpg, check. massive library of randomized gear, check.
but thats about it.
graphics aside. there are very view common features among the two games.
It would be like comparing never winter nights (with its small online capabilities) to guild wars (with its brouder more massive online capabilities).
Well, if I had to guess, it fails this test: "500 or more simultaneous players in one world."Yes, I know, GW and PSU probably fail as well, but I think they got on the site before the above rule was established (in fact, they were probably the reason the rule was created) so they get to stay.
500 or more players in one world...
as in, one server, or one zone. there is a difference.
most MMOs do not have more than 500 people in one zone. Nor could their servers handle it if it happened. Only a handful of MMOs such as WoW have a "seamless" world where loading new zones happens behind the scenes. And only a game like EvE has been challenged to have a single zone accommodate 500+ players.
In the end, if this site requires 500 people in 1 server, then HGL passes. If it requires 500 people in a single zone, than half the games on this site would fail.
guild wars and hellgate shouldnt be here.
Whether it's listed here or not, I'll be playing it.
The real nextgen in online RPGs is a game that is actually fun and not a boring: walk, search for group, or push button to craft fest. Actual game play in a game, very innovative. (And yes I was making fun of WoW)
Personally I agree that if Guildwars and Dungeon Runners is listed on here then there really isn't a reason why not to list HG:L.
I just dumped my Fury and Tabula Rasa preorders for HG:L.
--------------------------------
Currently Playing: Guild Wars 2 and Path of Exile
Quit: Eden Eternal, Wakfu, DDO, STO, DCUO, Sword 2, Atlantica Online, LOTRO, SWTOR, RIFT, Earthrise, FFXIV, RoM, Allods Online, GA,WAR,CO,V:SoH,POTBS,TR,COH/COV, WOW, DDO,AL, EQ, Eve, L2, AA, Mx0, SWG, SoR, AO, RFO, DAoC, and others.
www.twitter.com/mlwhitt
www.michaelwhitt.com
Greetings
And here i think you nail the proplem that there is with the definations that keeps HG:L out. There is really alot off people looking for multiplayer online games, comparing different ones on this site, that actual could enjoy having HG:L in the list. its the "massive" part of MMORPG that is creating the trouble!
i don't think the 500 players in one grafical area qualify as a very good way to seperate what is "massive". Simply because most MMORPGs is outright not playable if that many players comes together! And keeping games out because developers have taken responsibility for that, and set boundries to keep performance high, does not make sense to me. Especial if these game in alot of other ways cowers the aspect of being "Massive". As HG:L does, as Guild WARS does.
I personal feels this site lacks quality by not having HGL in. And if Guild Wars was not here as an exsample of that not all MORPG has to be with a monthly fee, then this site again would lack alot imho.
i think this is a case where the sites admins could look at if the rules serves the site! I personally would like to know if the admins think the rule is fine or think thats "its the least bad rule " that we could come up with. Because there is so many people that want's HG:L in here, and if its just because 1 rule that arguable not serves its purpose in the best way, then change the rule!
with regards Jondifool
(edited some spelling mistakes)
if its not an mmorpg why is it that almost all the other major mmo sites have Hellgate listed. hmm
Here's the official answer from Community Manager.
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/post/1606401#1606401
I would need to agree that it's not an MMO. At least, no more than Diablo 2 is an MMO. The multiplayer is exactly the same, only with the option of a subscription program that gets you extra content.
Bans a perma, but so are sigs in necro posts.
EAT ME MMORPG.com!
From my understanding HG:L and Guild Wars are definitely MMORPGs. I have also played Guild Wars and can confirm it.
Massively Multiplayer Online Role playing games.
So our definition of an MMORPG rests on solely what "massive" means. 500 on a server? Guild Wars passes. Im sure the HG:L servers will be able to handle at least 500 people per.
Now people bring up Diablo 2, quite frankly I was wondering why that wasn't here either. You have hundreds and hundreds of people playing simultaneously, you join up to do an instanced copy of the game.
___________________
Sadly, I see storm clouds on the horizon. A faint stench of Vanguard is in the air.-Kien
http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2006/12/13/
Err GW isn't the only non-MMOG on here...
DDO!
Why does this notion keep getting repeated here when it is refuted over and over? Not picking on you Kordesh, just using your post as an example.
The game is no different than DDO, or GW. It's not a chat lobby you log into find some people to go questing with and then off to the "game" when you hit start. It's not like Diablo 2. The "rules" that have been set forth on more than one occasion here have been answered already by someone, that actually shows the game fits the criteria.
Two glaring misconceptions that I see over and over in this thread are:
1. "Just like Diablo 2, not an MMO" - This isn't true. If your going to allow for games like GW or DDO or Dungeon Runners to exist in the lists, then you really can't deny HG:L to rank up there as they are set up in the same way, at least in how the persistant world is ran.
2. "Subscription based" - It isn't p2p. It IS free 100% to anyone (after purchasing the retail box). You DO have the option to pay for added content, perks, etc. This is no different than countless other games on here (alot of them total tish IMO). At least the poster I quoted gets this much of it right, in that paying is an "Option".
I see some that say it's a single player game with some multiplayer capabilities (ala Diablo), well it's really more like two things at once. There IS a single player game you get when you buy it. There is also a multiplayer portion of it though as well, seperate from the singleplayer portion. I remember AoC was supposed to have something like this, does that mean it isn't qualified any longer?
HG:L was designed to have a very robust online existence, the devs have stated this. Hellgate doesn't do anything more or less than DDO or GW does. There is more than "one" city for players to mingle in from what I understand as well.
You have alot of people who would like to see Hellgate get a listing here, why not look into it yourselves MMORPG.COM and find out if it qualifies? Although I think if you actually "deny" it from being listable, then you risk some credibility by allowing many of the aformentioned games...
just my 2cents...Either way I look forward to this game with or without this sites "approval" =P
I dont know much about Hellgate yet, but maybe it doesnt meet a few of the "unmentioned" MMO requirments.
1) Must have extremely slow, boring gameplay.
2) Must pretend to be an RPG.
3) Must have massive, repetitive grinds.
4) Must look, play, and feel exactly the same as every other MMO.
In Diablo II, there was no common area for players outside of those chat rooms. Guild Wars differed from this model (and it considered a MMO by many) because the towns were actual in-game gathering locations for players, even if leaving town resulted in an instanced experience. Hellgate: London works the same way, with hundreds is not thousands of plyers usng common town locations in-between leaving on instanced adventures/dungeons.
I personally would title this a MMORPG, one that also offers a single-player model, in addition to an enhanced subscription-based model.
(Going of the WoW model)
For ever hour played a half hour must be spent walking from one place to another with no action what so ever.
For every hour played 10 minutes must be spent hitting one button over and over to level up a trade skill.
For every hour played 10 minutes must be spent looking for a group.
For the 10 minutes that you are actually in combat, that combat must be no risk, auto aim and boring.
lol
I agree that Hellgate deserves serious consideration. While it's status as a true MMORPG might be in question, I think the target audience largely matches the readers of this website/forum. I'm sure plenty of people here would be interested in talking about/reviewing/flaming this game.
But I'm now taking a quick look through their website and I don't see the term 'MMORPG' anywhere. How are the developers categorizing their own game?
that's great !
I was asking for it since... a long time. in fact i was in alpha and now in beta, it strictly need to be listed here (not less than Dungeon Runner if you see what i mean). NDA now...
no, i suggest you all take a quick read here. From what im grasping out of it is, that there is a Single player and a free multiplayer that are linked, then there is the payed online that gets updated and is a different charicter, aka phantasy star esc.
Read here- http://www.gamespot.com/news/show_blog_entry.php?topic_id=25926223
"After the game's initial purchase, Hellgate: London's single-player campaign can be played either for free or upgraded to an Elite subscription account at $9.95 per month, which confers MMOG functionality to the title. It is rated M for Mature and goes on sale October 31."- Gamespot News blog
Can't we all just agree that it's a online multiplayer action RPG. And that MMOPRG.com can expand just a tad out of it's MMO box. Does everything on MMORPG.com have to be a classic MMO?
It's an RPG. It's multiplayer. It's persistent. It's online. Isn't that enough? Who cares if its not an MMO. Just because the site is called MMORPG, just seems too nitpicky to me.
Out of all the general gaming forums I go to (about 5 of them) There are more Hellgate threads on MMORPG than any other non-hellate specific site. So whether it's a MMO or not, people here are into it – that's what counts.
It has the exact same aspects as guild wars. It should be on here if guild wars is. Period. It has hubs, just like guild wars. You go out into instanced areas with a small number of people, just like guild wars. I would say it is more of an MMO then guild wars is, as there is actual character development in the game rather then maxing out really fast (or just getting 20 right at the start with a pvp character) and spam changing your spec in town. Character customization is a lot deeper (like it should be in an MMO) then it is in guild wars in skill trees as well as gear choices. If anything, Hellgate London should be on here and not Guild Wars.
Let's look at an MMORPG logically and in detail.
MMO - Massive(ly) Multiplayer Online
RPG - Role-Playing Game
Massive - means big, in this context it is modifying "multiplayer" to create a specific definition which is "a great many players" but is commonly defined as meaning "many thousands"
Multiplayer - it's latin, roughly translates as (more than one player)
Online - using the internet.
Role-Playing - when one accepts the persona of another.
Game - a thing to be played. singular.
Okay, now that we have our definitions, let's apply them to Guild Wars (which will be refered to as GW in the equation below)
if GW is a Game
If GW contains Role-Playing
If GW uses the internet
If GW accepts more than one player and is considered "multiplayer"
If GW is massive
Then GW = MMORPG.
Like it or not, there is no regularly scheduled update (patch) or fee (subscription) requirements to be considered an MMORPG. All you need is a lot of people accepting the role of another, playing over the internet together in a single game.
Summary: Guild Wars is an MMORPG, and while not a Subscription-based MMORPG nor a TradMMORPG, it is still an MMORPG.
Follow the above formula, plug in Hellgate: London... Implovers' simplistic mmorpg formula ftw?