Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
My take on the "M" in MMO
DeadlyByDez
Member Posts: 152
So this issue is literally driving me up the wall and I need to vent my opinions on the interwebs.
The question as to how much "M" is in the MMO part of this game is really the crux as to whether I even bother downloading the OB for this. I remember in the last few MMOs I have tried how alone I felt when ;
(a) not enough players In my vacinity
(b)No Lively global chat
(c)no player groups casually roaming around doing quests together
(d)no active social hubs
All I have read about this seems to point STO in the directions that this may be a lonely experience for me. However....
In playing devils advocate here I cant help but wonder if this is what one should expect from the Star Trek IP? I mean think about it. In all the episodes of ST you have watched, how many times have you seen a massive amount of ships gathered in the same area at anytime? Most of the time the ships and cruisers were flying solo. Apart from space staTions (ala DS9), where this was the only form of big groups.
So, as much as it pains me to say it, I think Cryptic may have gotten away with it..maybe unwittingy so. It still does not sit right with me though. As a paying consumer, it may still feel like I am playing a single player game with some social aspects...ala Battlefield 2 or neverwinter nights.
So discuss away
Comments
Ive heard alot about this in the last few years and i think the M as you put it means different things to different people. For me STO has been great in this regard, I can socialize as much or as little as i want to.
The best feature of the game to me is the open group system. If someone is on the same "episode" (read: multiarc quest) and you start the instance at near the same time it will auto group you and scale it to your group size. You can turn this off if you like so its not even force grouping.
In OB I have been in quite a few of these and most of the time not much chating has gone on except maybe a thank you at the end. But im thinking its because its a new feature and most people didnt even realize they were grouped lol. That has been commented on a few occations.
With the zone chats full everywhere ive been and tripping over other players. At this point in the OB finding people is not a problem.
The game i think falls close to guild wars in design the key difference being the sector map (world zone) is persistant were in GW it was itself instanced.
I have had no issue with any of these even in closed beta all the way through. I've always seen plenty of people around and doing quests and because all instances of a zone get cross-instance chat, you really are talking to everyone in that zone.
There's even more evidence of (c) because if you join a mission solo, but have open teaming on, you're plopped right into a casual group specifically to do that quest, and plenty of times I've seen those groups continue on to do the next quests in the chain (ie a patrol mission series) or what have you.
"Because it's easier to nitpick something than to be constructive." -roach5000
STO is actually much more instanced than Guild Wars =S
I find it odd that you start your statement complaining about how few people there are to interact with, followed by a statement of there being too many players groups for an episode.
I play in a sandbox.
(a) not enough players In my vacinity
Taking the game over to spam vill where 100s of spaceships are in the same vacinity is a bit pointless, groups of 3 would be ideal as its more in line with the Star Trek universe. Take every episode of ST, only when big battles, or the threat of big battles would more than 2 ships be there together. Get to know other captains, find (depending on your class) the other 2 that complement yourself and quest together. I would be mightly pissed off trying to do one quest when 100s of ships all fought for access to it.
(b)No Lively global chat
Tbh this is a great thing / bad thing. The good point to it, no more useless pointless crap chat we do get in mmo's as im fed up with arguements, silly questions, and the chuck norris crap that usually fills that little box.
Organising defense might just be the bad thing if no one is using it, would be nice for ship to ship intercom just like the shows movies tbh... like a cutscene
(c)no player groups casually roaming around doing quests together
This will change on launch day when the guild members all join up and people fed up paying extra ££££ for preorder copies, where it should be on sale cheaper... like why pay, 49.99 when it sells in store for 24.99 ??
(d)no active social hubs
This can change when cryptic add stations aka DS9...
Im looking forward to this mmo. as im fed up playing orcs, elfs and the like in mindless battle games. I want to do it in space lol
Those are instanced in STO as well. Cap per instance seems to be about 50 players.
Those are instanced in STO as well. Cap per instance seems to be about 50 players.
I don't get it, why would i want to surround myself with hundred of players instead of few say 20 or 50? what can i supposedly do with all those hundreds? i will never understand why people complaining so much about not being in open world with LOTS of people. i have played instanced as well as open world MMOS and number of players around me has no effect whatsoever on my gameplay.
If you live life with these unrealistic expectations, you'll continually be disappointed. Ask yourself why you play games period. You likely didn't start gaming with MMO's, so it's not to play with thousands of other people. While gaming with hundreds and thousands of people sounds fun, it really isn't. The truth is that people just don't get along as much as we should, because we're just thousands of individuals with our own agenda's and our own opinion of what we find fun. So if you're able to find a small group of people to play with, then you're doing good.
You also can't expect people to be where you are all the time, especially when a game is large. STO also hasn't released, so talking about social hubs is premature. STO seems to be focused on activity, not inactivity, so it's likely people will be in continuous motion, making it less likely to have people in your vicinity.
I won't comment on glocal chat, because I don't know. Although I do think global chat is both a curse and a blessing.
Well they are broken up into blocks and sharded to about 50 people thats how the server works, much like Champions online i think.
If there are only 40 people online in that zone they would all share the same shard. Thats how Crypic made the game 1 server for the whole world.
Its not so much an instance as it is a defined public space
If you do PVP, you're (obviously) playing with other people. Also, if you start a mission at the same time as someone else, you're automatically grouped with him/her/them. I haven't joined a fleet yet, but you'll have your fleet chat. Basically, I know where you're coming from but it's not as bad as you'd imagine.
It's not a, "complaint," as much as it is defining the game. There's simply nothing, "Massive," about Star Trek Online. The game feels very small due to all of the instancing, and due to the limited number of players that you can interact with.
What separates a game like Battlefield 2, Neverwinter Nights, Borderlands, or Two Worlds from getting the "MMO" tag? They have the same elements as an MMO. Heck, Neverwinter Nights even has the ability to link multiple servers. So why aren't these games called MMO?
As far as I'm concerned, they're not MMO because they do not feature "massive," numbers of players in the same game world. You are limited to a finite number of players in a particular zone/instance/server. Star Trek Online has the same limitations as these other games.
My personal opinion on these, "not-MMO," games is that they should fall into the same category as Guild Wars. As such, they should be billed like Guild Wars.
I believe that ultimately, STO will have a very limited subscriber base, and they will be forced to do what DDO has done, switch to an item mall rather than charge a monthly subscription. I believe that just about any, "not-MMO," game will have to do the same, or will face failure.
Thats your own personal definition. Massive means large number of people online playing a game (doesn't mean they have to be in one open world surrounding you all the time). Also the content in MMO differ it from games like Battlefield 2 and Neverwinter Nights so does the character progression. If you can't even see the difference then who is to be blamed?
Well they are broken up into blocks and sharded to about 50 people thats how the server works, much like Champions online i think.
If there are only 40 people online in that zone they would all share the same shard. Thats how Crypic made the game 1 server for the whole world.
Its not so much an instance as it is a defined public space
There's a map option in sector space called, "change instance." Apparently the developers consider them instances.
True o the op..but still im looking fo an mmo to play...and sto is not even near what an mmo is suposed to be,,for me they didnt get away with it...making missions 24/7 in small instances is not a game for me...
IMO anything with heavy instancing/zoning should lose the first M.
There is character progression in both Battlefield 2 and Neverwinter Nights. Persistent character progression. In battlefield 2, you unlock new weapons that your character can use.
In Neverwinter Nights, you can have many characters and you can level them up, give them skills, etc. Some server clusters have crafting, housing, etc.
So again, what makes these games different from STO?
There is character progression in both Battlefield 2 and Neverwinter Nights. Persistent character progression. In battlefield 2, you unlock new weapons that your character can use.
In Neverwinter Nights, you can have many characters and you can level them up, give them skills, etc. Some server clusters have crafting, housing, etc.
So again, what makes these games different from STO?
The word here is CONTENT. The day games like Neverwinter Nights and Battlefield 2 gets major content updates like MMO, please feel comfortable to call them MMO.
Guild Wars, STO, AOC all are MMO's whether they fall in your own area of personal definitions or not.
The Guild Wars developers do not consider Guild Wars to be MMO... They have said so on multiple occasions. AoC and STO have tried to push similar technology off as MMO. I think that both of them are wrong to do so. Ultimately, I believe that both games will either fail, or will have to adjust their subscription system because of it.
The Guild Wars developers do not consider Guild Wars to be MMO... They have said so on multiple occasions. AoC and STO have tried to push similar technology off as MMO. I think that both of them are wrong to do so. Ultimately, I believe that both games will either fail, or will have to adjust their subscription system because of it.
I have been hearing this line 'X MMO will fail' for years now. AOC hasn't failed so far and no chance in hell STO will fail. As far as Guild Wars is concerned call it CORPG or MMORPG, but it still doesn't change the fact it comes into category of MMO's. Arenanet can label their product in whatever manner they desire. But only because its called CORPG doesn't mean its in same category as online shooters like Battlefield 2.
Mine either. Once again, this is another sour grapes debate because the game didn't go in the direction that some wanted. It's an MMORPG whether or not some to choose to call it that or not.It's on this site because it fits in the paramters of what a true MMORPG is. Deal with it.
Currently Playing: World of Warcraft
For me, this has nothing to do with sour grapes. I had no expectations going in. I beta test every game that I can, in search of, "the next big thing." From what I have seen, this game isn't it.
My take is about as unbiased as you can get. I'm simply posting about what I've seen from this game. I have also stated that the game is fun. I have no agenda against the game. I simply do not consider it to be Massive Multi-player. It's a limited multi-player experience, and it should be recognized as such.
I feel the same way. However, I look at it from the viewpoint of 'how often am I going to be forced to group to experience content'?
Grouping is fine, and can be fun, but oh how I loathe any quest giver saying "Go find x friends...." grrrr.
And this nitpicking about how a game doesn't meet one person's definition of MMO is silly. Who cares how you categorize it? Is the game fun to play? That question is all that really matters for any game.
Mine either. Once again, this is another sour grapes debate because the game didn't go in the direction that some wanted. It's an MMORPG whether or not some to choose to call it that or not.It's on this site because it fits in the paramters of what a true MMORPG is. Deal with it.
RPG in Star Trek? hmmmmm that is stretching it.. so is the MMO part as well.. I play NCAA Football online against other players and even play golf on Tiger Woods in tourneys with other players on my PS3.. I would not call EITHER of them a MMORPG.. YES, my character in golf is NO different then any avatar in STO..
There are two "M"s in MMO.
so...
There are two "M"s in MMO.
High 5s all round for you...