I've just recently experienced a MMORPG burn-out so I thought I'd give GWs a shot. For a first immpresion, I am very satisifed with what I've seen. GWs, in my option, is in a class of its own and almost makes the big MMOs like WoW and LOTRO look bad is some ways. I just recently bought the GWs trilogy, including all three games and the recent expansion for high level characters. I'm new to the series so everything is totally new to me. If I continue to enjoy GWs I likely wont return to another MMO for years. That includes the upcoming blockblusters Aion (same makers of GWs) and Mortal, which I'm sure will likely be along the same MMORPG trend we seen for years. Is it me or is GWs highly under-rated? The graphics are well above average, the interface is flawless, and the work and thought put into this game is unbelievable. I've yet to hit level 10+ so I cant say much about mid - end game but from what I've seen GWs is going to keep me busy for many months to come. Looks like I picked up the series just in time to try it out before GW 2 hits the shelves. If I was religious, I'd say it was fate :-) ............... Oh did I mention its free per month? O.O
What are others thoughts on the Trilogy and recent end-game expansion? Feel free to flame or give GWs the props it deserves. I'm only looking for people opinions. :-)
Guild wars is a total solofest game,it is a cheap design so that the resources/cost needed is less.Graphics are not above average ,they are bang on average,the same graphics you can get in any F2P or NCSOFT game.
The game play is decent ,i am not going to downplay that,but like i said it is designed to solo,so that leaves 50% of what game play a MMORPG can bring to the table.Why settle for less and play a single player game that pretends to be a mmo?
Realistically all the NCSOFT games are pretty much identical,they throw in a slightly different curve to warrant their games as new,but in reality are the same old same old.
My stance on NCSOFT is one that you are better off playing Runes Of Magic for free than pay these guys for the same type of games, and in many areas ,NCSOFT is a lesser quality game.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Guild wars is a total solofest game,it is a cheap design so that the resources/cost needed is less.Graphics are not above average ,they are bang on average,the same graphics you can get in any F2P or NCSOFT game.
The game play is decent ,i am not going to downplay that,but like i said it is designed to solo,so that leaves 50% of what game play a MMORPG can bring to the table.Why settle for less and play a single player game that pretends to be a mmo?
Realistically all the NCSOFT games are pretty much identical,they throw in a slightly different curve to warrant their games as new,but in reality are the same old same old.
My stance on NCSOFT is one that you are better off playing Runes Of Magic for free than pay these guys for the same type of games, and in many areas ,NCSOFT is a lesser quality game.
Guild wars is made by ArenaNet and not NCSoft and if you play solo you choose to do so.
You can team up with 7 others if you like so it aint solo. Before they introduced heroes it was damn hard to solo even
(yet not impossible)
Graphics are still not bad IMO, 4 years ago it was def 1 of the better looking online game on the marked
Gameplay well thats everyone its own you like it or you dont
Guild Wars is an MMO whether you like it or not. Remember this mantra...
Have you ever given independent thought on what qualifies an MMO? If you want to listen to others instead of thinking for yourself, maybe you should listen to the GW devs, that claimed themselves that it isn't an MMO?
Guild Wars is DEFINITELY under rated. I would say Guild Wars is one of, if not the best MMO on the market right now. From the skill system, to the lack of gear and level time sinks, to the great content and stories, this game is absolutely superb(Not to mention it is free to play).
For those not saying it's an MMO, LOL. What's not MMO about it? Lets see, Massively - Well, maybe players per zone isn't as big as some other MMOs, but Guild Wars puts every single player in the same virtual world. Any player that plays can meet up with any other player that plays in game. That in a way makes it much more massive than all of the other sharded MMOs. So where is "Massively" specifically defined? It isn't. So while Guild Wars isn't massive in one area, it definitely is massive in other ways. Multi-player - Obviously. Online - Yep. RPG - Yep. Looks like an MMORPG to me. And the fact that MMORPG.com considers it an MMORPG kind of seals the deal on that discussion huh?
Tried: LotR, CoH, AoC, WAR, Jumpgate Classic Played: SWG, Guild Wars, WoW Playing: Eve Online, Counter-strike Loved: Star Wars Galaxies Waiting for: Earthrise, Guild Wars 2, anything sandbox.
Guild Wars is an MMO whether you like it or not. Remember this mantra...
Have you ever given independent thought on what qualifies an MMO? If you want to listen to others instead of thinking for yourself, maybe you should listen to the GW devs, that claimed themselves that it wasn't an MMO?
I will do what most people would do in this situation.
LOL we don't need the whole wiki just this. "Guild Wars is an episodic series of multiplayer online role-playing games developed by ArenaNet and published by NCsoft" That is all he needs to see really.
Yeah but this just isnt worth it anymore.
Do we really think he will suddenly say we are right even though we have given him true evidence of criteria?
The day MMORPG.com makes an official definition on what constitutes an MMO, then I will consider them an authority. But no, you can't even get them to discuss it. They just lump anything into their list.
Here you go:
"Does it meet our requirements?
1. Make sure that the game isn't already on our list. We know that this sounds simple, but there are a lot fo them and sometimes they get overlooked.
2. The game must be based entirely inside of a graphical world. 3D, 2D and 2.5D games are all welcome on our list, but unfortunately we are unable at this time to provide listing for text-based MUDs.
3. The game should have the capability to support at least 500 congruent users on a single server. This is not a reflection of the game's current subscriber count, but rather reflects the capabilities of a game's technology.
4. The game must include some form of graphical common area where players can interact with one another inside of the persistent game world. This excludes lobby and chat room based interaction.
5. The game must make use of persistent characters. This means that you should be able to log in after logging out and find your character as advanced as you left them (or more).
6. The game must contain some form of character advancement."
Have you ever given independent thought on what qualifies an MMO? If you want to listen to others instead of thinking for yourself, maybe you should listen to the GW devs, that claimed themselves that it isn't an MMO?
Okay I will bite.
But first lets come up with definitions to figure this out.
Lets start with the definition of "Massively"...
If you want to go down this road....you will lose.
I think Abrahmm Just sailed the boat for him. Cause I think GW fits into everything that MMORPG.com considers an MMO.
Yeah, it fits in there perfectly.
The only argument against it being an MMO is because of the instances and their limits on how many people can play in them. While that limit isn't "Massive", Guild Wars puts all of the millions of players playing it into one virtual world, making it more massive than almost every other MMO out now. So, it is indeed massive, just not in the normal sense.
Tried: LotR, CoH, AoC, WAR, Jumpgate Classic Played: SWG, Guild Wars, WoW Playing: Eve Online, Counter-strike Loved: Star Wars Galaxies Waiting for: Earthrise, Guild Wars 2, anything sandbox.
Originally posted by Abrahmm Here you go: "Does it meet our requirements? 1. Make sure that the game isn't already on our list. We know that this sounds simple, but there are a lot fo them and sometimes they get overlooked.
2. The game must be based entirely inside of a graphical world. 3D, 2D and 2.5D games are all welcome on our list, but unfortunately we are unable at this time to provide listing for text-based MUDs.
3. The game should have the capability to support at least 500 congruent users on a single server. This is not a reflection of the game's current subscriber count, but rather reflects the capabilities of a game's technology.
4. The game must include some form of graphical common area where players can interact with one another inside of the persistent game world. This excludes lobby and chat room based interaction.
5. The game must make use of persistent characters. This means that you should be able to log in after logging out and find your character as advanced as you left them (or more).
6. The game must contain some form of character advancement."
"3. The game should have the capability to support at least 500 congruent users on a single server. This is not a reflection of the game's current subscriber count, but rather reflects the capabilities of a game's technology."
There you have it. Where can GW have 500 simultaneous users? It can't.
Apart from that, that is shitty classifications overall, and doesn't go to the root of what makes an MMO. Look at 6 for instance, what the hell has character advancement got to do with MMO? Or RPG for that matter? What if you chose to make a game where it is the player's personal skill that should advance, and not the character's?
Shitty classification has resulted in everything getting lumped onto this site.
I think Abrahmm Just sailed the boat for him. Cause I think GW fits into everything that MMORPG.com considers an MMO.
Yeah, it fits in there perfectly.
The only argument against it being an MMO is because of the instances and their limits on how many people can play in them. While that limit isn't "Massive", Guild Wars puts all of the millions of players playing it into one virtual world, making it more massive than almost every other MMO out now. So, it is indeed massive, just not in the normal sense.
Millions of players into one VW? Rofl, gimme a fekking break.
Originally posted by Abrahmm Here you go: "Does it meet our requirements? 1. Make sure that the game isn't already on our list. We know that this sounds simple, but there are a lot fo them and sometimes they get overlooked.
2. The game must be based entirely inside of a graphical world. 3D, 2D and 2.5D games are all welcome on our list, but unfortunately we are unable at this time to provide listing for text-based MUDs.
3. The game should have the capability to support at least 500 congruent users on a single server. This is not a reflection of the game's current subscriber count, but rather reflects the capabilities of a game's technology.
4. The game must include some form of graphical common area where players can interact with one another inside of the persistent game world. This excludes lobby and chat room based interaction.
5. The game must make use of persistent characters. This means that you should be able to log in after logging out and find your character as advanced as you left them (or more).
6. The game must contain some form of character advancement."
"3. The game should have the capability to support at least 500 congruent users on a single server. This is not a reflection of the game's current subscriber count, but rather reflects the capabilities of a game's technology."
There you have it. Where can GW have 500 simultaneous users? It can't.
Apart from that, that is shitty classifications overall, and doesn't go to the root of what makes an MMO. Look at 6 for instance, what the hell has character advancement got to do with MMO? Or RPG for that matter? What if you chose to make a game where it is the player's personal skill that should advance, and not the character's?
Shitty classification has resulted in everything getting lumped onto this site.
Well, by "Server" in that definition, they mean shard, or instance of the game world(because all games use server clusters and don't put all of their players on one piece of hardware). With that clarified, Guild Wars actually puts 4million+ players in their shard, because they have one shard for every single player in the game. Massive, I know. Way more than 500.
Tried: LotR, CoH, AoC, WAR, Jumpgate Classic Played: SWG, Guild Wars, WoW Playing: Eve Online, Counter-strike Loved: Star Wars Galaxies Waiting for: Earthrise, Guild Wars 2, anything sandbox.
I think Abrahmm Just sailed the boat for him. Cause I think GW fits into everything that MMORPG.com considers an MMO.
Yeah, it fits in there perfectly.
The only argument against it being an MMO is because of the instances and their limits on how many people can play in them. While that limit isn't "Massive", Guild Wars puts all of the millions of players playing it into one virtual world, making it more massive than almost every other MMO out now. So, it is indeed massive, just not in the normal sense.
Millions of players into one VW? Rofl, gimme a fekking break.
GW is no more massive than CS.
As I said the fact that you even equate or compare GW to CS proves you do not know your ass from a hole in the ground. Are you even a gamer?
I think Abrahmm Just sailed the boat for him. Cause I think GW fits into everything that MMORPG.com considers an MMO.
Yeah, it fits in there perfectly.
The only argument against it being an MMO is because of the instances and their limits on how many people can play in them. While that limit isn't "Massive", Guild Wars puts all of the millions of players playing it into one virtual world, making it more massive than almost every other MMO out now. So, it is indeed massive, just not in the normal sense.
Millions of players into one VW? Rofl, gimme a fekking break.
GW is no more massive than CS.
Don't worry, I didn't miss the fact that your reply contained absolutely no counter-argument at all.
Tried: LotR, CoH, AoC, WAR, Jumpgate Classic Played: SWG, Guild Wars, WoW Playing: Eve Online, Counter-strike Loved: Star Wars Galaxies Waiting for: Earthrise, Guild Wars 2, anything sandbox.
I've just recently experienced a MMORPG burn-out so I thought I'd give GWs a shot. For a first immpresion, I am very satisifed with what I've seen. GWs, in my option, is in a class of its own and almost makes the big MMOs like WoW and LOTRO look bad is some ways. I just recently bought the GWs trilogy, including all three games and the recent expansion for high level characters. I'm new to the series so everything is totally new to me. If I continue to enjoy GWs I likely wont return to another MMO for years. That includes the upcoming blockblusters Aion (same makers of GWs) and Mortal, which I'm sure will likely be along the same MMORPG trend we seen for years. Is it me or is GWs highly under-rated? The graphics are well above average, the interface is flawless, and the work and thought put into this game is unbelievable. I've yet to hit level 10+ so I cant say much about mid - end game but from what I've seen GWs is going to keep me busy for many months to come. Looks like I picked up the series just in time to try it out before GW 2 hits the shelves. If I was religious, I'd say it was fate :-) ............... Oh did I mention its free per month? O.O
What are others thoughts on the Trilogy and recent end-game expansion? Feel free to flame or give GWs the props it deserves. I'm only looking for people opinions. :-)
Tried it and found it way too instanced to feel like an MMORG. So much that I wont classify it as an MMORPG.
As someone else mentioned, GW is more like CS than an MMORPG. Never did I see more than 16 people engaged in the same instance, except the towns ofcourse but they are nothing but social hubs. They can put one of those in CS and that would not make it an MMORPG.
Originally posted by Abrahmm Here you go: "Does it meet our requirements? 1. Make sure that the game isn't already on our list. We know that this sounds simple, but there are a lot fo them and sometimes they get overlooked.
2. The game must be based entirely inside of a graphical world. 3D, 2D and 2.5D games are all welcome on our list, but unfortunately we are unable at this time to provide listing for text-based MUDs.
3. The game should have the capability to support at least 500 congruent users on a single server. This is not a reflection of the game's current subscriber count, but rather reflects the capabilities of a game's technology.
4. The game must include some form of graphical common area where players can interact with one another inside of the persistent game world. This excludes lobby and chat room based interaction.
5. The game must make use of persistent characters. This means that you should be able to log in after logging out and find your character as advanced as you left them (or more).
6. The game must contain some form of character advancement."
"3. The game should have the capability to support at least 500 congruent users on a single server. This is not a reflection of the game's current subscriber count, but rather reflects the capabilities of a game's technology."
There you have it. Where can GW have 500 simultaneous users? It can't.
Apart from that, that is shitty classifications overall, and doesn't go to the root of what makes an MMO. Look at 6 for instance, what the hell has character advancement got to do with MMO? Or RPG for that matter? What if you chose to make a game where it is the player's personal skill that should advance, and not the character's?
Shitty classification has resulted in everything getting lumped onto this site.
Well, by "Server" in that definition, they mean shard, or instance of the game world(because all games use server clusters and don't put all of their players on one piece of hardware). With that clarified, Guild Wars actually puts 4million+ players in their shard, because they have one shard for every single player in the game. Massive, I know. Way more than 500.
Only 2 other games I know of that does this is EvE, and Darkfall. Meaning 1 server or shard for thier entire game. Guess they aren't MMO's either.
By Ras's definition, EvE is NOT an MMO. Because eve is broken down into space sectors, meaning instances. Also the missions are instanced in a way. You have to jump through gates to reach the other sectors of space.
Originally posted by Abrahmm Here you go: "Does it meet our requirements? 1. Make sure that the game isn't already on our list. We know that this sounds simple, but there are a lot fo them and sometimes they get overlooked.
2. The game must be based entirely inside of a graphical world. 3D, 2D and 2.5D games are all welcome on our list, but unfortunately we are unable at this time to provide listing for text-based MUDs.
3. The game should have the capability to support at least 500 congruent users on a single server. This is not a reflection of the game's current subscriber count, but rather reflects the capabilities of a game's technology.
4. The game must include some form of graphical common area where players can interact with one another inside of the persistent game world. This excludes lobby and chat room based interaction.
5. The game must make use of persistent characters. This means that you should be able to log in after logging out and find your character as advanced as you left them (or more).
6. The game must contain some form of character advancement."
"3. The game should have the capability to support at least 500 congruent users on a single server. This is not a reflection of the game's current subscriber count, but rather reflects the capabilities of a game's technology."
There you have it. Where can GW have 500 simultaneous users? It can't.
Apart from that, that is shitty classifications overall, and doesn't go to the root of what makes an MMO. Look at 6 for instance, what the hell has character advancement got to do with MMO? Or RPG for that matter? What if you chose to make a game where it is the player's personal skill that should advance, and not the character's?
Shitty classification has resulted in everything getting lumped onto this site.
Well, by "Server" in that definition, they mean shard, or instance of the game world(because all games use server clusters and don't put all of their players on one piece of hardware). With that clarified, Guild Wars actually puts 4million+ players in their shard, because they have one shard for every single player in the game. Massive, I know. Way more than 500.
I have never seen a screenshot of GW with many players, not one. What is the limit of each instance of GW cities?
Your socalled "4 million+" (any higher? Anyone?) isn't by any means put in the same world. Maybe on 400.000 instances of the GW city (to even imagine GW to have 4+ million simultaneous players... they would probably beat WoW in that case, lol).
CS has just as many instances of any given map, and in the CS lobby you can talk to anyone, just like you can in the GW 3D lobby (the city).
The only persistance that GW has, is the character. That makes it indistinguishable from BF2 and other modern shooters with character development. You have no impact on the world at all. When the instance you were in, dies, there is no sign at all that you have ever been there.
I've just recently experienced a MMORPG burn-out so I thought I'd give GWs a shot. For a first immpresion, I am very satisifed with what I've seen. GWs, in my option, is in a class of its own and almost makes the big MMOs like WoW and LOTRO look bad is some ways. I just recently bought the GWs trilogy, including all three games and the recent expansion for high level characters. I'm new to the series so everything is totally new to me. If I continue to enjoy GWs I likely wont return to another MMO for years. That includes the upcoming blockblusters Aion (same makers of GWs) and Mortal, which I'm sure will likely be along the same MMORPG trend we seen for years. Is it me or is GWs highly under-rated? The graphics are well above average, the interface is flawless, and the work and thought put into this game is unbelievable. I've yet to hit level 10+ so I cant say much about mid - end game but from what I've seen GWs is going to keep me busy for many months to come. Looks like I picked up the series just in time to try it out before GW 2 hits the shelves. If I was religious, I'd say it was fate :-) ............... Oh did I mention its free per month? O.O
What are others thoughts on the Trilogy and recent end-game expansion? Feel free to flame or give GWs the props it deserves. I'm only looking for people opinions. :-)
Guild wars is a total solofest game,it is a cheap design so that the resources/cost needed is less.Graphics are not above average ,they are bang on average,the same graphics you can get in any F2P or NCSOFT game.
The game play is decent ,i am not going to downplay that,but like i said it is designed to solo,so that leaves 50% of what game play a MMORPG can bring to the table.Why settle for less and play a single player game that pretends to be a mmo?
Realistically all the NCSOFT games are pretty much identical,they throw in a slightly different curve to warrant their games as new,but in reality are the same old same old.
My stance on NCSOFT is one that you are better off playing Runes Of Magic for free than pay these guys for the same type of games, and in many areas ,NCSOFT is a lesser quality game.
I've played all the big MMOs out and GWs is as polished, if not, more polished then 90% of the games out. Its also unique, which is more then I can say for AoC/WAR *cough cough* Its all solo? You obviously havent played it lately....the new expansion added 18 mutilevel dungeons....
Comments
Guild wars is a total solofest game,it is a cheap design so that the resources/cost needed is less.Graphics are not above average ,they are bang on average,the same graphics you can get in any F2P or NCSOFT game.
The game play is decent ,i am not going to downplay that,but like i said it is designed to solo,so that leaves 50% of what game play a MMORPG can bring to the table.Why settle for less and play a single player game that pretends to be a mmo?
Realistically all the NCSOFT games are pretty much identical,they throw in a slightly different curve to warrant their games as new,but in reality are the same old same old.
My stance on NCSOFT is one that you are better off playing Runes Of Magic for free than pay these guys for the same type of games, and in many areas ,NCSOFT is a lesser quality game.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Yeah, I totally need enlightened on a video game classification....
Hey Rasputin,
I call it a mmo as well, how about them apples?
Also, is it really necessary to multi-quote people?
Guild Wars is classified is an MMO whether you like it or not. This pains you. It hurts you. Does it creep into your bed at night and bite you?
It is like that fly that keeps buzzing around your head and you cant swat it.
Guild Wars won best MMO of year a while back.
It hurts huh...deep...even a scar?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guild_Wars_(series)
Guild Wars is an MMO whether you like it or not. Remember this mantra...
This statement is perhaps the most wrong statement I have seen in 20+ years of reading message boards..
ANY F2P game? Are you kidding?
Guild wars is a total solofest game,it is a cheap design so that the resources/cost needed is less.Graphics are not above average ,they are bang on average,the same graphics you can get in any F2P or NCSOFT game.
The game play is decent ,i am not going to downplay that,but like i said it is designed to solo,so that leaves 50% of what game play a MMORPG can bring to the table.Why settle for less and play a single player game that pretends to be a mmo?
Realistically all the NCSOFT games are pretty much identical,they throw in a slightly different curve to warrant their games as new,but in reality are the same old same old.
My stance on NCSOFT is one that you are better off playing Runes Of Magic for free than pay these guys for the same type of games, and in many areas ,NCSOFT is a lesser quality game.
Guild wars is made by ArenaNet and not NCSoft and if you play solo you choose to do so.
You can team up with 7 others if you like so it aint solo. Before they introduced heroes it was damn hard to solo even
(yet not impossible)
Graphics are still not bad IMO, 4 years ago it was def 1 of the better looking online game on the marked
Gameplay well thats everyone its own you like it or you dont
Guild Wars is classified is an MMO whether you like it or not. This pains you. It hurts you. Does it creep into your bed at night and bite you?
It is like that fly that keeps buzzing around your head and you cant swat it.
Guild Wars won best MMO of year a while back.
It hurts huh...deep...even a scar?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guild_Wars_(series)
Guild Wars is an MMO whether you like it or not. Remember this mantra...
LOL we don't need the whole wiki just this.
"Guild Wars is an episodic series of multiplayer online role-playing games developed by ArenaNet and published by NCsoft"
That is all he needs to see really.
Guild Wars is classified is an MMO whether you like it or not. This pains you. It hurts you. Does it creep into your bed at night and bite you?
It is like that fly that keeps buzzing around your head and you cant swat it.
Guild Wars won best MMO of year a while back.
It hurts huh...deep...even a scar?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guild_Wars_(series)
Guild Wars is an MMO whether you like it or not. Remember this mantra...
Have you ever given independent thought on what qualifies an MMO? If you want to listen to others instead of thinking for yourself, maybe you should listen to the GW devs, that claimed themselves that it isn't an MMO?
Guild Wars is DEFINITELY under rated. I would say Guild Wars is one of, if not the best MMO on the market right now. From the skill system, to the lack of gear and level time sinks, to the great content and stories, this game is absolutely superb(Not to mention it is free to play).
For those not saying it's an MMO, LOL. What's not MMO about it? Lets see, Massively - Well, maybe players per zone isn't as big as some other MMOs, but Guild Wars puts every single player in the same virtual world. Any player that plays can meet up with any other player that plays in game. That in a way makes it much more massive than all of the other sharded MMOs. So where is "Massively" specifically defined? It isn't. So while Guild Wars isn't massive in one area, it definitely is massive in other ways. Multi-player - Obviously. Online - Yep. RPG - Yep. Looks like an MMORPG to me. And the fact that MMORPG.com considers it an MMORPG kind of seals the deal on that discussion huh?
Tried: LotR, CoH, AoC, WAR, Jumpgate Classic
Played: SWG, Guild Wars, WoW
Playing: Eve Online, Counter-strike
Loved: Star Wars Galaxies
Waiting for: Earthrise, Guild Wars 2, anything sandbox.
Guild Wars is classified is an MMO whether you like it or not. This pains you. It hurts you. Does it creep into your bed at night and bite you?
It is like that fly that keeps buzzing around your head and you cant swat it.
Guild Wars won best MMO of year a while back.
It hurts huh...deep...even a scar?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guild_Wars_(series)
Guild Wars is an MMO whether you like it or not. Remember this mantra...
Have you ever given independent thought on what qualifies an MMO? If you want to listen to others instead of thinking for yourself, maybe you should listen to the GW devs, that claimed themselves that it wasn't an MMO?
I will do what most people would do in this situation.
Show links or it didn't happen.
Yeah but this just isnt worth it anymore.
Do we really think he will suddenly say we are right even though we have given him true evidence of criteria?
The day MMORPG.com makes an official definition on what constitutes an MMO, then I will consider them an authority.
But no, you can't even get them to discuss it. They just lump anything into their list.
Here you go:
"Does it meet our requirements?
1. Make sure that the game isn't already on our list. We know that this sounds simple, but there are a lot fo them and sometimes they get overlooked.
2. The game must be based entirely inside of a graphical world. 3D, 2D and 2.5D games are all welcome on our list, but unfortunately we are unable at this time to provide listing for text-based MUDs.
3. The game should have the capability to support at least 500 congruent users on a single server. This is not a reflection of the game's current subscriber count, but rather reflects the capabilities of a game's technology.
4. The game must include some form of graphical common area where players can interact with one another inside of the persistent game world. This excludes lobby and chat room based interaction.
5. The game must make use of persistent characters. This means that you should be able to log in after logging out and find your character as advanced as you left them (or more).
6. The game must contain some form of character advancement."
From here www.mmorpg.com/faq.cfm/showFaq/4/I-think-there-is-a-game-that-needs-to-be-added-to-your-list-How-do-I-submit-this.html
Tried: LotR, CoH, AoC, WAR, Jumpgate Classic
Played: SWG, Guild Wars, WoW
Playing: Eve Online, Counter-strike
Loved: Star Wars Galaxies
Waiting for: Earthrise, Guild Wars 2, anything sandbox.
Okay I will bite.
But first lets come up with definitions to figure this out.
Lets start with the definition of "Massively"...
If you want to go down this road....you will lose.
I think Abrahmm Just sailed the boat for him.
Cause I think GW fits into everything that MMORPG.com considers an MMO.
Yeah, it fits in there perfectly.
The only argument against it being an MMO is because of the instances and their limits on how many people can play in them. While that limit isn't "Massive", Guild Wars puts all of the millions of players playing it into one virtual world, making it more massive than almost every other MMO out now. So, it is indeed massive, just not in the normal sense.
Tried: LotR, CoH, AoC, WAR, Jumpgate Classic
Played: SWG, Guild Wars, WoW
Playing: Eve Online, Counter-strike
Loved: Star Wars Galaxies
Waiting for: Earthrise, Guild Wars 2, anything sandbox.
"3. The game should have the capability to support at least 500 congruent users on a single server. This is not a reflection of the game's current subscriber count, but rather reflects the capabilities of a game's technology."
There you have it. Where can GW have 500 simultaneous users? It can't.
Apart from that, that is shitty classifications overall, and doesn't go to the root of what makes an MMO. Look at 6 for instance, what the hell has character advancement got to do with MMO? Or RPG for that matter? What if you chose to make a game where it is the player's personal skill that should advance, and not the character's?
Shitty classification has resulted in everything getting lumped onto this site.
Yeah, it fits in there perfectly.
The only argument against it being an MMO is because of the instances and their limits on how many people can play in them. While that limit isn't "Massive", Guild Wars puts all of the millions of players playing it into one virtual world, making it more massive than almost every other MMO out now. So, it is indeed massive, just not in the normal sense.
Millions of players into one VW? Rofl, gimme a fekking break.
GW is no more massive than CS.
"3. The game should have the capability to support at least 500 congruent users on a single server. This is not a reflection of the game's current subscriber count, but rather reflects the capabilities of a game's technology."
There you have it. Where can GW have 500 simultaneous users? It can't.
Apart from that, that is shitty classifications overall, and doesn't go to the root of what makes an MMO. Look at 6 for instance, what the hell has character advancement got to do with MMO? Or RPG for that matter? What if you chose to make a game where it is the player's personal skill that should advance, and not the character's?
Shitty classification has resulted in everything getting lumped onto this site.
Well, by "Server" in that definition, they mean shard, or instance of the game world(because all games use server clusters and don't put all of their players on one piece of hardware). With that clarified, Guild Wars actually puts 4million+ players in their shard, because they have one shard for every single player in the game. Massive, I know. Way more than 500.
Tried: LotR, CoH, AoC, WAR, Jumpgate Classic
Played: SWG, Guild Wars, WoW
Playing: Eve Online, Counter-strike
Loved: Star Wars Galaxies
Waiting for: Earthrise, Guild Wars 2, anything sandbox.
Yeah, it fits in there perfectly.
The only argument against it being an MMO is because of the instances and their limits on how many people can play in them. While that limit isn't "Massive", Guild Wars puts all of the millions of players playing it into one virtual world, making it more massive than almost every other MMO out now. So, it is indeed massive, just not in the normal sense.
Millions of players into one VW? Rofl, gimme a fekking break.
GW is no more massive than CS.
As I said the fact that you even equate or compare GW to CS proves you do not know your ass from a hole in the ground. Are you even a gamer?
I think you ride the failboat to school.
Yeah, it fits in there perfectly.
The only argument against it being an MMO is because of the instances and their limits on how many people can play in them. While that limit isn't "Massive", Guild Wars puts all of the millions of players playing it into one virtual world, making it more massive than almost every other MMO out now. So, it is indeed massive, just not in the normal sense.
Millions of players into one VW? Rofl, gimme a fekking break.
GW is no more massive than CS.
Don't worry, I didn't miss the fact that your reply contained absolutely no counter-argument at all.
Tried: LotR, CoH, AoC, WAR, Jumpgate Classic
Played: SWG, Guild Wars, WoW
Playing: Eve Online, Counter-strike
Loved: Star Wars Galaxies
Waiting for: Earthrise, Guild Wars 2, anything sandbox.
Tried it and found it way too instanced to feel like an MMORG. So much that I wont classify it as an MMORPG.
As someone else mentioned, GW is more like CS than an MMORPG. Never did I see more than 16 people engaged in the same instance, except the towns ofcourse but they are nothing but social hubs. They can put one of those in CS and that would not make it an MMORPG.
My gaming blog
"3. The game should have the capability to support at least 500 congruent users on a single server. This is not a reflection of the game's current subscriber count, but rather reflects the capabilities of a game's technology."
There you have it. Where can GW have 500 simultaneous users? It can't.
Apart from that, that is shitty classifications overall, and doesn't go to the root of what makes an MMO. Look at 6 for instance, what the hell has character advancement got to do with MMO? Or RPG for that matter? What if you chose to make a game where it is the player's personal skill that should advance, and not the character's?
Shitty classification has resulted in everything getting lumped onto this site.
Well, by "Server" in that definition, they mean shard, or instance of the game world(because all games use server clusters and don't put all of their players on one piece of hardware). With that clarified, Guild Wars actually puts 4million+ players in their shard, because they have one shard for every single player in the game. Massive, I know. Way more than 500.
Only 2 other games I know of that does this is EvE, and Darkfall. Meaning 1 server or shard for thier entire game. Guess they aren't MMO's either.
By Ras's definition, EvE is NOT an MMO. Because eve is broken down into space sectors, meaning instances. Also the missions are instanced in a way. You have to jump through gates to reach the other sectors of space.
EvE isn't an MMO either.
"3. The game should have the capability to support at least 500 congruent users on a single server. This is not a reflection of the game's current subscriber count, but rather reflects the capabilities of a game's technology."
There you have it. Where can GW have 500 simultaneous users? It can't.
Apart from that, that is shitty classifications overall, and doesn't go to the root of what makes an MMO. Look at 6 for instance, what the hell has character advancement got to do with MMO? Or RPG for that matter? What if you chose to make a game where it is the player's personal skill that should advance, and not the character's?
Shitty classification has resulted in everything getting lumped onto this site.
Well, by "Server" in that definition, they mean shard, or instance of the game world(because all games use server clusters and don't put all of their players on one piece of hardware). With that clarified, Guild Wars actually puts 4million+ players in their shard, because they have one shard for every single player in the game. Massive, I know. Way more than 500.
I have never seen a screenshot of GW with many players, not one. What is the limit of each instance of GW cities?
Your socalled "4 million+" (any higher? Anyone?) isn't by any means put in the same world. Maybe on 400.000 instances of the GW city (to even imagine GW to have 4+ million simultaneous players... they would probably beat WoW in that case, lol).
CS has just as many instances of any given map, and in the CS lobby you can talk to anyone, just like you can in the GW 3D lobby (the city).
The only persistance that GW has, is the character. That makes it indistinguishable from BF2 and other modern shooters with character development. You have no impact on the world at all. When the instance you were in, dies, there is no sign at all that you have ever been there.
Guild wars is a total solofest game,it is a cheap design so that the resources/cost needed is less.Graphics are not above average ,they are bang on average,the same graphics you can get in any F2P or NCSOFT game.
The game play is decent ,i am not going to downplay that,but like i said it is designed to solo,so that leaves 50% of what game play a MMORPG can bring to the table.Why settle for less and play a single player game that pretends to be a mmo?
Realistically all the NCSOFT games are pretty much identical,they throw in a slightly different curve to warrant their games as new,but in reality are the same old same old.
My stance on NCSOFT is one that you are better off playing Runes Of Magic for free than pay these guys for the same type of games, and in many areas ,NCSOFT is a lesser quality game.
I've played all the big MMOs out and GWs is as polished, if not, more polished then 90% of the games out. Its also unique, which is more then I can say for AoC/WAR *cough cough* Its all solo? You obviously havent played it lately....the new expansion added 18 mutilevel dungeons....
"I play Tera for the gameplay"