Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
In your own opinion, what is the definition of mmo?
mechwarrior
Member Posts: 241
If you wiki it - A massively multiplayer online game (also called MMOG) is a video game which is capable of supporting hundreds or thousands of players simultaneously.
So where do go from here? Let's look at this from the macro level first. Are we requesting that the phrase "mmo" be researched and analyzed? Or do we need to go micro and define each of the words. I believe that if we take each other for granted we will not realized that it ( the phrase mmo) is relative to each gamer, respectively, and then is decided to be found wanting or not depending on past experiences and gut instinct.
I'm not sure that I'm up right now for breaking it down so fruitlessly, so I'll just give you my input.
I believe Global Agenda is an mmo, and a great gametm.
seriously though, what do yall think?
Comments
An MMO is something the vast majority of people refer to as an MMO, quite simply, often following the game dev's lead. For example I could plausibly argue that a movie is really, in essence, a glorified picturebook, pages flipped at a high speed, but that won't really fly, will it ? So to it matters little whether a minority thinks differently, as is the case of Guild Wars, for example. (despite the fact that this minority is quite vocal on, note, mmo forums about it)
The meanings of terms such as these tends to change over time, ever so slightly, by defining a set number of characteristics we limit ourselves. Words are used, one defines a term by its usage, regardless of its origin or intended meaning. Most words that comprise the modern languages are used completely differently from their intended meaning and new dictionary revisions constantly tweak definitions based on common usage.
In our case, the term, its use and meaning bears no scientific repercussions, a journalistic sign, its meaning determined by the vox populi. If GW is listed on most mmo sites, which it is, then clearly its an mmo, end of story. You can flaunt your wonderful list of checkboxes that diagnose something as an mmo, but it will be of no use.
Thus arguing about its precise definition is an exercise in futility, for every new mmo bends said definition ever so slightly.
- Shijeer
All Im going to say, to avoid tautology is that, there is nothing Massive about MMORPGs anymore. Not even if you consider the first M of the acronymn as an adjective regarding the numeric scale of players only. Anything with less than "hundreds", this means atleast 200 players is not considered an MMORPG.
200 players on the majority of the games areas. If there are areas where those 200 players cant play together, then it has to be a insignificant % of the total area.
200 players connected on a server doesnt satisfy the requisite, from all the possible methods of interpretation, the gramatical one is the most weak one. Historical, Teleological, Cultural, Logical and other interpration methods are more accurate and they weight on the side that argues MMORPGs requires hundreds of players being able to interact with each other concurrently in the same area at any time if they so wish too.
The opposing argument, wants to use the popularity of the genre, to label their own product a MMO itself, so they can sell and advertise it and proffit from it as such. Even though is anti-ethical, hypocrital to do so, gamers are defenseless at this time and age. Its cheaper and easier and more profitable for gaming companies that their side of the argument wins.
Consumerist laws are still yet to be applied for the services online these gaming companies are providing.
Making a MMORPG as it meant to be is not easy, if game companies stayed true to those requisites, we WOULDNT have hundreds of MOGs, calling themselfs MMOs or MMORPGs. You kick a bush and you find a new "MMO" starving for you money: "play now and win!" "free offer" "buy credits now!". If popular websites werent so hypocrite in the way they deal with this, how they allow certain advertisings and their omissions regarding their responsability with their communities to filter what is and what isnt an MMORPG, there wouldnt remain 1/5 of games listed on this site.
-> Looking for "TRUE MMORPG" website/community.
Personally,in my own opinion of what the definition of a MMO is,is something to take you away from reality. Something that after a rough day,you can just turn on start playing and have a good relaxing yet,intense(if you so choose) time. It's something you enjoy doing and can have fun with. But,that's just my personal definition of a MMO......here's a official definiton though,
A Massive Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game, sometimes also referred to as a Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game. In these types of games large numbers of players battle together, or against one another, in a huge online environment. The RPG element of MMORPG indicates that games of this type also include Role Playing Elements, suggesting that the characters you play as will 'level up,' or increase their abilities as their experience and time put into the game increases.
=].
What's wrong with that definition? It explains what an MMO(G) is.
- RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right?
- FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
I think its a Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game. But hey thats just me.
Do we really Need another thread on this?
Oh wait,,,, this MMORPG.com, where people bring up the same arguments over and over and over again using muti threads.
hey Me next
SandBox vs Vacume Cleaner? Take your Pick
i think its a persistant world, one which doesnt stop just because u log off, no save butten or anything.
Playing EVE
Played Darkfall, Played Wow,
So how do you make a Turn Based MMORPG?
Since when do we accept Turn Based games as MMORPGs?
Damn...
You see? I told people we shouldnt soften up when Guild Wars was bashing the doors of the genre.
Now look at what the genre has become! We even have those tick, turn, action points, BROWSER BASED games calling themselfs MMORPGs.
Even games without graphics calling themselfs MMORPGs.
What is next? Facebook MMORPGs?!
I hope you're not referring to MUDs...
Check out the MUD I'm making!
thats because they are.
I think the problem is that MMORPG is just too broad.
It's a bit like "heavy metal" (music). .
Seriously, how do Styx, Scorpions, Slayer, Iron Maiden, King Diamond, Rainbow, Motorhead, ACDC, Rammstein, Riot, Nickleback, Def Leppard etc etc all end up in the same bin together?
I think what is needed is something that separates out the 'Traditional MMOs' away from some of the newer games which really occupy the middle ground between MMOs and Multi-player games played online.
For me, one of the key features is persistence... but of the player... not just the world.
This is a loop hole many games are 'exploiting' IMHO.
A 'True MMO' should have a world where the player has a presence even when they log out - maybe a shop - or a house - or even the player's avatar itself. And the key factor is that other players should still be able to interact in a meaningful way with this persistent presence.
Sound hard? Well, there are Browser based MMOs that manage this (Pardus and NexusWar to name two) so I don't think it's too much to ask of an "AAA Title".
Below that, there are more sub classes needed.
Open Worlds (EvE)
Zoned Worlds (Close to true MMOs but with loading screens - The Chronicles of Spellborn)
I propose the Graphical Lobby Game (where there is a Graphical Lobby - which is often a Travel Map etc - PotBS).
Maybe also a "Directed Instance Game" where the game directs people to an instance based on load (DDO and Champions Online)
And the amount of instancing used should also factor into the definition.
Edit: I would not suggest MMORPG.com is a good place to try to define MMOs though - this site lost all credibility when they listed Travian and Evony IMHO
Nothing says irony like spelling ideot wrong.
My definition is simply: An online game with lots of other players.
MMORPG: The above, with RPG character progression + combat.
MMOFPS: The above, with FPS combat.
Beyond that, I don't sweat the specifics. Just seems an odd thing to obsess about.
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
So the Dawn of War Online Multiplayer is an MMO then?
How about the Facebook games?
Nothing says irony like spelling ideot wrong.
MMORPG , MMO part is about when over 1000 player can play same game and there is possibility that they all can be in same place and see all other players characters inside the game. The RPG part means roleplaying game as taking role of character.
MMORPG.COM has worst forum editor ever exists
So the Dawn of War Online Multiplayer is an MMO then?
How about the Facebook games?
Dunno about Dawn of War, never played it.
Facebook games are MMOs, yup.
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
I just want to thank everyone for not putting in an erroneous apostrophe when pluralizing the acronym (MMOs vs MMO's). It's a Christmas miracle.
If only one player can play and be in the same game, but many people can start they own game, it's single player online game.
If more than one player can play and be in same game same time it's multiplayer online game.
So Facebook games are not massive multiplayer online games.
MMORPG.COM has worst forum editor ever exists
With regard the Wiki links - another poster has noted that the Wiki page has been changed recently
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/263809/Vandalization-of-the-wikipedia-on-the-MMORPG-page.html
So, sadly, in this case the Wiki page is no more reliable than anyones individual opinion here.
Now, the second part of your post is where I believe many MMO developers are finding an 'exploit' in the definition.
Cryptic is the classic example.
Look at Champions Online.
Can {all players} be in same place and see all other players characters inside the game?
Yes, they can. But not all at once.
Due to the way the Cryptic Engine (What I call 'instance director software') works it is entirely possible that any player can meet any other player. Even if the instances are only restricted to 20 players each.
It's possible in much the same way it's possible to win the lottery.
But all that engine does is automate the function that players perform manually in games like Battlefield...
So is it an MMO... well it operates in that hazy middle ground IMHO... and hence we keep having threads like this.
Nothing says irony like spelling ideot wrong.
If only one player can play and be in the same game, but many people can start they own game, it's single player online game.
If more than one player can play and be in same game same time it's multiplayer online game.
So Facebook games are not massive multiplayer online games.
If the actions of one player can affect another player, it's a multiplayer game.
If the actions of a massive number of players can affect another player, it's an MMO.
So ya, Facebook games meet the requirements to be classifed as MMOs for me.
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
Was it ever?
I don't mean to troll/derail, but Wiki pages have always been coloured by subjective opinion. I've never considered the information presented in them to be either definitive or unbiased.
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
I tend to try to be as literal as possible so I stick with the actual definition nothing more or less and that's why I too consider Guild Wars an mmo (and no I don't play it by the way though I did for one week).
The problem with people trying to argue for terms to mean what they "feel" it does is that then you have to spend the rest of your life trying to convince others why your own definition is the best/most appropriate one, and of course this is often because of personal feelings and experiences you may have that others obviously don't.
My wife tells me often I'm a know it all (and she's right) but why bring that to the internet to people who could care less who I am and what I think I know? Why not just deal with facts as opposed to perceptions?
but yeah, to call this game Fantastic is like calling Twilight the Godfather of vampire movies....
Was it ever?
I don't mean to troll/derail, but Wiki pages have always been coloured by subjective opinion. I've never considered the information presented in them to be either definitive or unbiased.
Yes, but some entries are better than others.
In this case though - especially considering the audience here (many of whom are 'experts' on MMOs)and the context of this discussion the Wiki link is not much use.
Nothing says irony like spelling ideot wrong.
If only one player can play and be in the same game, but many people can start they own game, it's single player online game.
If more than one player can play and be in same game same time it's multiplayer online game.
So Facebook games are not massive multiplayer online games.
If the actions of one player can affect another player, it's a multiplayer game.
If the actions of a massive number of players can affect another player, it's an MMO.
So ya, Facebook games meet the requirements to be classifed as MMOs for me.
It's not actions what defines it, it's ability see those actions in realtime and be with the other players. Other ways this forum is MMOG, because we play word games here and they affect others. Can in facebook 100's of players play SAME game where everyone who playes that game can see what others are doing in realtime. I'm not talking about the result of the players actions, but actual playing.
Tetris where You compete with others results is single player online game.
Chess where two players are competing realtime as they see others actions, it's multiplayer online game.
PS: Realtime means in this case that players are connected to the same game same time.
MMORPG.COM has worst forum editor ever exists
MMO = Massively Multiplayer Online.
"Multiplayer" and "Online" are self-explanatory.
"Massive" in general means "substantial". Just like "some", "many", "a few", "a lot" etc, "massive" doesn't refer to a specific quantity. To me, a really massive MOG should have 100k+ players online at the same time but then there will only be a few realistically, so I think in the current market condition, you may calll an online game with just a few hundreds players online at the same time as "MMO".